After the discussion to of which mutt series to use, I think it's only fair that we open up the topic a little bit. I think that there are exceptions to the rule that we always use a released version marked as stable. Some projects don't have release schedules that match this line of thinking. So, in addition to mutt, I propose that we move to development version of HTML Tidy and ffmpeg.
It's clear that there's never going to be another release of tidy. Even the tarball we have is just a snapshot from a random day before their "snapshot generator" broke. I think that we should make our own snapshots from their CVS. So long as it's tested like any other package, there's no difference between us using our on snapshot versus a snapshot they made a year and a half ago.* ffmpeg is in nearly the same boat but more difficult to analyze because a lot of different packages use it. However, those projects usually bundle a snapshot themselves, not a released version. Read this interesting blog from one of the gst-ffmpeg developers (the part about ffmeg is at the end): http://blogs.gnome.org/view/uraeus/2007/02/15/0 He basically says that they bundle a specific version of ffmpeg with their releases because the API changes so wildly. That's a slightly different topic, but I'd say that installing a recent snapshot is no more dangerous than using that old prerelease. I doubt that any of the other projects we build (transcode, mplayer) are optimized for that old version. What do you guys think? -- Dan * Randy suggested the same thing about tidy a year ago and I said no. Consider this a total reversal in my stance :) -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
