> > > there must be a way to call tcl85 and tcl86 something else than both
> > > "Tcl" right? Meaning maybe also seek ways to reconcile these in Tcl
> > > land & potentially other multiple versions environments. W/ regards,
> > > please excuse me, if this is out of line or just plain inappropriate.
> >
> > I don't think renaming stuff in ports would be wise. It would cause
> > a considerable maintenance burden for the port maintainer, and
> > having stuff renamed to something differing from upstream might
> > also surprise people who only use one single version.
>
> I agree completely, thank you for enumerating these consequences as well.
> I presumed it'd be offsetting to add the question of branching & version
> numbering of software (programming languages most frequently), ending up
> in various cuts (as the "maintained" releases). Still I wanted to query
> your stance on the version names in relation to manual pages, as this is
> where it all ends (and just begins depending on view point, introductory
> approach, development methods). Thanks for considering this byway point.
That's a lot of talk for
"Wow, you are suggesting I should do the work, but I my only
skill is to post to misc, and wow, that feels too much like
a call".
End of story.
Please shut up "lists". Everyone tires of your well articulated
agenda pushes.
