Thomas Klausner <wiz%netbsd.org@localhost> writes: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 08:35:18AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: >> We seem to be having confusion or a revert war with evince, without >> discussion. > > No. Patrick removed the evince3 entry from the category Makefile > without removing the package (which I think he intended). John just > added it because the weekly script output complained about a missing > entry in the category Makefile. I see. But if it was intended that evince3 should remain, that puts evince in the category of needing multiple versions because of upstream behavior, and thus print/evince should have a versioned name. That's what I was getting at by "do we believe we do not need to have more than one in the next 3 years", and it seems the answer is "today we need more than one", not "we won't"??
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature