On Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 11:16:50PM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 12:49:33PM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 03:32:20PM -0700, Peter Valchev wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Rafael Sadowski <raf...@sizeofvoid.org> > > > wrote: > > > > On Fri Mar 18, 2011 at 09:17:23PM +0500, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > > >> I prepared diff update x11/fvwm2 to 2.5.31 (on request and test mikeb@) > > > >> > > > >> current x11/fvwm2 - 2.4.20 (stable branch) > > > >> last version fvwm2 - 2.5.31 (unstable branch) > > > >> > > > >> mikeb@ work with 2.5, no regression found. > > > >> > > > >> What should I do? Update current port, or separate port(fvwm2-devel)? > > > >> > > > > I don't think that any work with stable branch. In my opinion, separate > > > > port like fvwm2-devel is the best choice but perhaps, a port like mutt > > > > with subdirs stable and snapshot (for fvmw unsable) is also good. > > > > > > Previously it seemed silly to have 2 versions... what's the motivation > > > not to stick with -stable? I'm really curious. > > > > > > I really don't see the point of two versions, but if there is such a > > > demand, then stable/snapshot model makes sense. > > > > Prepare stable/snapshot model port. > > > > Anyone? > > -- > Alexandr Shadchin
I do it. It should be finished next week. OK? -- http://www.sizeofvoid.org - raf...@sizeofvoid.org XMPP: z...@jabber.ccc.de Key fingerprint: BDDD 91E9 28CB 3A52 3E99 61B0 C359 2691 BAC6 A3B1
