*-devel ports

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2008-02-04 11:27:24 -0600, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> Regarding the suggestion to rename all *-devel ports to *-latest, in  
> light of the above change, the name "latest" would indeed seem to be  
> clearer. It would also remove any potential confusion with the RPM - 
> devel packages, which IMHO would be quite a good thing.

I think this would be a good idea.

> I guess this is as good a time as any to bring up the "tin" ports:
>
> $ port search ^tin$ ^tin-
> tin                            news/tin       1.8.3        A threaded  
> NNTP and spool based UseNet newsreader
> tin-devel                      news/tin-devel 1.7.10       A threaded  
> NNTP and spool based UseNet newsreader
> tin-recent                     news/tin-recent 1.9.2        A Usenet  
> newsreader
> $
>
> Now, ignore the version numbers shown for a minute. Based on comments in 
> the header of "tin-recent" (copied below), it seems to be the  
> maintainer's intention (hey, that's you, Vincent!) that "tin" is the  
> latest released version, "tin-devel" is the latest development version, 
> and "tin-recent" is the more recent of the two. It looks like someone has 
> updated tin-recent but forgotten to update tin-devel. So, to match 

AFAIK, tin-devel is no longer maintained (and perhaps no longer used).

> Vincent's new proposals, "tin-devel" gets deleted and "tin-recent" gets 
> renamed to "tin-latest", yes?

+1 for this new policy.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent at vinc17.org> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)