[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Nmh-workers] Fwd regarding nmh 1.1 release candidate 4

From: Harald Geyer
Subject: [Nmh-workers] Fwd regarding nmh 1.1 release candidate 4
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:09:12 +0200

Hi List!

Nick Rusnov, the current Debian maintainer of nmh asked me to forward
the following message to this list:

------- Forwarded Message

Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:25:38 -0700
From: Nick Rusnov <address@hidden>
To: Harald Geyer <address@hidden>
Subject: nmh list stuffa
Message-ID: <address@hidden>

On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 12:56:32PM -0400, Ken Hornstein wrote:
> My $0.02 regarding the whole 1.1 release naming:
> I would have preferred that 1.1 not really be out there.  I never
> announced it and I couldn't remove it, but somehow it ended up as the
> release for a bunch of systems.  I never considered this a "real"
> release myself.
> But as Jon has discovered, there are plenty of people out there who
> will speak up when they think you're doing the wrong thing, but damn
> few who will actually help.  My advice to Jon is: do what you want, and
> the rest of the world will have to suck it up if they don't like it.
> You're doing the work: that gives you the right to make the decision.
> I think he should give consideration to other people's opinions, but
> the decision is ultimately his.

I guess I should pipe up with why debian has a 1.1-release nmh package.

The debian package is based on the appearently ill-fated 1.1-release
that was uploaded to somewhere or other (savannah I assume). My memory
is a bit fuzzy but I could've sworn there was some sort of announcement,
although the closest I could find was this message from Ken


Not an announcement by any means. 

Even though the the package is version 1.1-release it wouldn't be much
of an imposition to have another 1.1 "real" release, as I could version
it a variety of ways (1.1-release-official and 1.1-release2 evaluate as
'greater' versions than 1.1-release, and of course 1.2 is greater than
1.1-release also). Maybe to reduce users' confusion 1.2 would be better,
but it can't be claimed that its needed for package management version

- -- 
- -><- Nick Rusnov
- -><- http://nick.industrialmeats.com
- -><- address@hidden/address@hidden 

------- End of Forwarded Message

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]