[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug#13578: [IMPORTANT] A new versioning scheme for automake releases
Diego Elio Pettenò
Re: bug#13578: [IMPORTANT] A new versioning scheme for automake releases, and a new branching scheme for the Git repository
Fri, 01 Feb 2013 01:09:44 +0100
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130113 Thunderbird/17.0.2
On 31/01/2013 20:58, Jack Kelly wrote:
> IMHO, that seems like a great way to cause trouble for unsuspecting
> users. (Anyone remember KDE4.0?) Can you expand on why you think it's a
> good plan?
Because unlike KDE, automake can put a big fat warning in the generated
configure that says "You're using a version unsuitable for production",
and then people would understand it much better.
KDE 4.0 was a screwup because there was no big fat warning, and users
insisted to have it. No user _asks_ for automake.
> Is there a system like X.beta1, X.beta2, ..., X.0 that is going to fit
> the ordering system for most package managers? Bonus points if it works
> in asciibetical order, too.
Good luck finding one. Gentoo would be fine with X.Y_betaZ — but I
honestly dislike X.Yb because that kind of stuff is usually _after_ X.Y
for almost everything but autotools..
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
address@hidden — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
- Re: bug#13578: [IMPORTANT] A new versioning scheme for automake releases, and a new branching scheme for the Git repository, (continued)