On Thursday, 24 February 2005, at 14:12:42 (+0800), Didier Casse wrote: > E has also been downgraded from 0.17-xxx to 0.16.999.001. Hmm from the > point of view of an rpm managed system, if somebody doesn't realize > this and do something like: > > apt-get update or yum check-update... they would never be able to > know that there exist a latest version coz the latest one has a > lower version! Same applies to some efls. I'm not saying this is > right or wrong but we need to tell the people that there's been a > regression in the version numbering so that they wipe out the older > versions first.
I've been doing packaging for a very long time, and I'm well aware of the issues associated with downgrading. This has nothing to do with my statement. On Thursday, 24 February 2005, at 15:29:54 (+0900), Carsten Haitzler wrote: > yes :0 thats why it's in my commit log - we need to do this for > sanity. No we don't. First off, release numbers are for packages, not vendor source. Second, every spec file in CVS uses a release number of 0.YYYYMMDD or something similar. This cleanly and efficiently provides the "snapshot" concept and information in a form which, when a release is made, can be easily updated such that the release will replace the snapshot. > i downgraded ONLY those packages that were pre_ something and needed > downgrading. Not true at all. You added the ".001" to a grand total of 18 packages. Only THREE of those packages (evas, ecore, and e) actually used the _pre. The rest you obfuscated for no apparent reason. > the extra .001 is now instead of that - and lets us to just a set of > releases without having to bum the maj/min/micro version. You didn't have to in the first place. It was already taken care of. Only 3 packages had the _pre problem which was causing the "integer expression expected" error when doing version comparisons. > we can bump those separately as needed. so the .specs just need to > add an extra version filed (the .001). it may be time to make all > the packaging stuff auto-generated... :/ We did that before, and it was a huge hassle. You really should leave the packaging details to the packagers and focus on the stuff that actually needs your attention. Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Come stand a little bit closer. Breathe in and get a bit higher. You'll never know what hit you when I get to you." -- Savage Garden, "I Want You" ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
