Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/devel/gal20
To: Dieter Baron <email@example.com>
From: Rene Hexel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/02/2004 17:45:56
On 02/10/2004, at 3:06 PM, Dieter Baron wrote:
> Might I suggest, then, that gal is renamed to gal1 and gal2 to gal?
> Since gal-2.2 is the default version (at least for new projects), I
> think it's less confusing if it has the default name.
I don't think this is a good idea. This way we will have to keep
renaming packages (as this is a moving target), with tons of
unnecessary rebuilds. If packages are renamed at all, I would suggest
renaming gal to gal1 and gal2 to gal22. This way, there is no "gal"
package and there is no need to constantly rename packages in the
> Might I go even further and suggest that that be doucumented in
> Packages.txt (or its XML replacement) (wording improvements welcome):
This is only a good idea for packages/APIs that remain fairly stable
for a long period of time (e.g. perl, php and the like). For gnome and
similar libraries, this will cause all sorts of problems as package
names are then no longer backward compatible (what used to be 'gal' two
weeks ago is now 'gal27'). Given that the last gnome rebuild orgy took
more than 5 days on my machine, I'd prefer a more stable scheme (as