On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 16:18, John Nilsson wrote: > > If you've ever used cvs, which we do for our portage tree, you will know > > that moving packages is far more painful than the "no effort" you suppose. > > Due to the number of packages that make up XFCE, suggesting such a large > > move > > would not be taken lightly. > > Is there any particular feature in cvs that subversion could not provide?
Tseng's initial statement is a bit misleading, it has nothing to do with cvs. It's a move that can and should be handled by portage, but it's still tedious. I personally do agree though that this (XFCE4) naming convention has been wrong from the start and have brought it up before on IRC. Gentoo, unlike some binary based distros, has no reason to use version numbers in package names because of the SLOTs system and we should make as extensive use of this as possible. That doesn't change the fact that this is a lot of work and it's up to the maintainers to find time to do this. It has no immediate importance, but it should be on their TODO. - foser -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
