Subject: Re: mozilla
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Shin'ichiro TAYA <email@example.com>
Date: 10/05/2000 12:22:05
From: Hubert Feyrer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 03:08:25 +0200 (MET DST)
> we currently have:
> www/mozilla with PKGNAME=mozilla-1.0m17
> In PR 11118, we have a mozilla-current that's past m17.
> I'd like to import that somewhen (during the freeze? after? what's your
> opinion?), and have:
> www/mozilla with PKGNAME=mozilla-0.9.m17
> www/mozilla-current with PKGNAME=mozilla-0.9.m17.YYYYMMDD
nightly/latest/mozilla-source.tar.gz changes almost everyday.
Everytime you make package, you should do 'make makesum'.
Is it reasonable?
> naming the pkg 1.0m17 was a bad thing in the first place, as it is NOT 1.0
> yet, and given the way pkg depends work, we can't represent a "before" by
> tacking something on, but only a "after" (bigger).
> What makes things more funny is that we aparently renamed the mozilla pkg
> already from 5.0 to 1.0, which breaks things a lot any way.
> When the new scheme's implemented, I will remove any existing binary pkgs
> from the FTP server that'll break the scheme.
> Any objections?
Roadmap has changed and version rule has changed also.
Next release (maybe late Oct.) will be M18.
But after M18, versions are 0.6(base of Netscape 6.0), 0.9, 0.9.1,
1.0, 1.0.1, ...
See the roadmap bellow
www/mozilla sould be based on stable version X.X.0
www/mozilla-current should be based on version X.X.1
Version rule is clear except M18.
Name of package for M18 should be 'mozilla-M18', but this may break
version rule of NetBSD package system.
But M18 is much faster and implmented more features than M17 and M18
should be improrted...