-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Svetoslav Slavtchev wrote:
>>On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, John Allen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wednesday 03 September 2003 10:17, Radek Vybiral wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Robert Pollak wrote:
>>>>>Does this mean there will be no further stabilizing branch after
>>9.2, to
>>>>>  eventually get a 9.2.1?
>>>>
>>>>You may get 9.2.1 = 9.2 + updates.
>>>Whilst this is true, it would perhaps be better to have a real 9.2.1,
>>>9.2.2
>>>etc....

> may be when there are important bug-fixes(updates)
> a metapackage for all the updates could be provided
> and increase the release number

This:
a)Serves no purpose
b)Creates extra unnecessary complication for people who ensure their
packages are still usable on older distros.

>>We have systems with service packs, patched, build ID greater than release
>>build, but major release number is always without touch.
>>
>>Many packages takes version from /etc/mandrake-release, many commercial
>>programs are build for exact version of release, etc.
>
> really ?
> this seems a bit strange for me

Take a look at the samba spec file, and you will see some good reasons
for this. The fact that the compatability was kept with older releases
meant that we could release samba-2.2.7a packages in updates for all
supported distros, instead of Vince having to apply the patch to the
ancient then-current packages for the specific distros, without ending
up with extra packages (samba-winbind and nss_wins were introduced with
8.2 IIRC, 8.1 and earlier didn't have acl libraries, 9.2 will be the
first with alternatives etc etc etc.). If you look at the samba FTP
mirrors, you will also notice that we provide updated samba packages for
all supported releases, built both with and without LDAP support
(compile-time choice), building for an additional 10 point releases
would be a waste of my time (=> I wouldn't do it).

Also, it really is only worthwhile bumping a release number if there are
new features (this is what OSX does AFAIK, they don't have a new release
just for security updates, no-one would pay for it - although maybe Mac
users are content to pay for bugfixes ;-)).

Regards,
Buchan

- --
|--------------Another happy Mandrake Club member--------------|
Buchan Milne                Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager
Cellphone * Work            +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202
Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering         http://www.cae.co.za
GPG Key                   http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc
1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/Vd6QrJK6UGDSBKcRAlcaAJ0Z5MF/uIP2sWRER+Cvp0OOeUQuzQCcC48+
PkdXiDB2GkHFzVST57uF6WI=
=xTvo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

*****************************************************************
Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our
e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy.
*****************************************************************

Reply via email to