On Wednesday, 24 April 2002 at 3:16:43 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > > The X11 we are talking about here is not "the default X11", which is > a set of distfiles, but a "ports" X11, which is not, but which is > likely to be the basis of future distfiles.
Correct. > So we are really talking about an alternate set of code to provide > or not provide the TCP "X11 display service". More to the point, we're telling people that this is XFree86, a platform-independent package which we also supply. But it's not quite XFree86 because we've modified it. The modification in this case is very small but very far-reaching, and a newcomer would suspect the operating system, not XFree86, when he has problems. > The thing that offended the hell out of everyone way that the > decision was made for the future distfiles release (which is used by > practically everyone) by sneaking it in the ports back door (which > is used by practically no one), which, when viewed disparagingly, > looks like an attempt to "pull a fast one". Hmm. No, I for one wasn't "offended the hell". And I really don't see any malice here: it was done with the best of intentions, but I think without a proper understanding of the consequences. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
