Re: reimport mesa 18, remove old MesaLib packages

[Tobias Nygren <tnn%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 14:00:33 -0500
Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:

> I generally do not like renaming because it breaks automatic upgrades,
> but if that is broken anyway (because most people are running 18??),
> then moving to a name that is better aligned with upstream and in use in
> other packaging systems (?) sounds good.

The upstream package was renamed from MesaLib to mesa in version 11
(2015). I have no idea what version people run. As of right now,
version 11 will be pulled in by if you build from source. However, if
you do a full bulk build then version 18 will be used because it's
version number is higher. This is confusing and not a good situation. 

> Do you literally mean 'mesa', or do you mean 'mesa18'?  It seems that
> the history of mesa is messy enough that it has earned a long-time stay
> in the status of only being versioned.  Or do you think that you can not
> only remove all the other versions, but that we will be able to have
> exactly one version at all times over the next 3 years (meaning
> just upgrades, but not needing to have an older one for anybody for any
> reason)?

In my opinion version 18 should not have been imported as a separate
package but should have replaced version 11. We need only one package
going forward. The GL API itself is quite stable even if the hardware
support move fast.

Kind regards,
-Tobias