Jean-Michel Dault wrote:I think the current way is correct...
Le lun 17/03/2003 � 03:10, David Walser a �crit :
We used to have both old and new versions of horde/imp packaged, which was why the newer ones were called horde2/imp3. Now that the old ones are gone, the packages should be renamed horde/imp. This is post-9.1 stuff obviously.
Well, eventually there will be horde3/imp4, and we'll have the same problem of having to include both versions.
So IMHO, if it ain't broke, don't fix it =)
Jean-Michel
But why will we have to include both versions? Why not fix it now (post-9.1) so that horde/imp will always be named such in the future.
***** This e-mail was scanned for viruses by RAV Antivirus *****
That way horde2/imp3 replaces horde/imp. Follow-on versions would simply 'replace' older versions.
This may also ease the management at a distribution level (bigger picture).
What you could end up with:
horde/imp: mdk 8.2, 9.0
horde2/imp3: mdk 9.0, 9.1, 9.x
horde3/imp4: mdk 9x., ...
L8tr,
S
