Marcus Ramberg wrote:
On 6/26/06, *Marcus Ramberg* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey gang.
I've just pushed Catalyst 5.70_01 to CPAN. You can check it out here:
[..]
http://search.cpan.org/src/MRAMBERG/Catalyst-Runtime-5.70_01/Changes
Sorry about the mixup.
Matt S Trout [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[..]
for example: first 5.6902, then 5.70_1 then 5.70. From debian point of
view 5.70 is before 5.6902, 5.70_1 is invalid (so probably should be
changed to 5.70.01 but then it's after 5.70 so probably should be changed
into 5.69-5.70pre1 etc.). But this
Hello Matt!
5.70_01 IS A DEV RELEASE. So you don't want to be packaging it anyway.
Non really (with Gentoo, at least). I package the DEV releases of
Catalyst and DBIx::Class with the ~arch keyword, so that a user doesn't
get the automatic upgrade to those versions unless he explicitly
Please be consistent with the number of digits in the versioning
scheme. While it may be easy for humans to guess that 5.7001 comes
before 5.80, packaging tools like RPM and APT could easily get
confused. While such problems could be worked around by using tricks
like epoch numbers, it
Derek Poon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please be consistent with the number of digits in the versioning
scheme. While it may be easy for humans to guess that 5.7001 comes
before 5.80, packaging tools like RPM and APT could easily get
confused. While such problems could be worked around
Derek Poon wrote:
Please be consistent with the number of digits in the versioning
scheme. While it may be easy for humans to guess that 5.7001 comes
before 5.80, packaging tools like RPM and APT could easily get
confused. While such problems could be worked around by using tricks
Krzysztof Krzyżaniak wrote:
Derek Poon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please be consistent with the number of digits in the versioning
scheme. While it may be easy for humans to guess that 5.7001 comes
before 5.80, packaging tools like RPM and APT could easily get
confused. While such
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 01:50:25PM -0700, Derek Poon wrote:
Please be consistent with the number of digits in the versioning
scheme. While it may be easy for humans to guess that 5.7001 comes
before 5.80, packaging tools like RPM and APT could easily get
confused. While such problems
Matt S Trout [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Krzysztof Krzyżaniak wrote:
Derek Poon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please be consistent with the number of digits in the versioning
scheme. While it may be easy for humans to guess that 5.7001 comes
before 5.80, packaging tools like RPM and APT
To: The elegant MVC web framework
Subject: [Catalyst] [announce] Catalyst 5.70 developer release.
Hey gang.
I've just pushed Catalyst 5.70_01 to CPAN. You can check it out here:
http://search.cpan.org/~mramberg/Catalyst-5.70_01/
One of the big news in this release is a split into Catalyst::Runtime
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 10:18:54AM +0200, Krzysztof Krzyzaniak wrote:
Marcus Ramberg wrote:
I've just pushed Catalyst 5.70_01 to CPAN. You can check it out here:
Is final version will be numbered as 5.70?
5.7000 or 5.7 hopefully :-)
Your friendly FreeBSD ports guy,
--
Lars Balker
11 matches
Mail list logo
