[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       netbsd-tech-pkg
Subject:    Re: evince versions
From:       Greg Troxel <gdt () lexort ! com>
Date:       2022-10-27 13:09:43
Message-ID: rmiilk54dm0.fsf () s1 ! lexort ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Thomas Klausner <wiz@netbsd.org> 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"??


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]