Shaddy Baddah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > > On 2/6/2006 9:48 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> According to Corinna Vinschen on 2/6/2006 4:17 AM: >>>> Sorry to interject, but could I make a request that, like unison, >>>> this package be tied into a version. e.g. jikes1.14 distinct from >>>> jikes1.22? >>> That's an intersting objection. Any comments from others? Jari? >>> >> I don't think this is worthwhile. As the former jikes maintainer for >> several years, I personally know that 1.14 has bugs (some of them mine :) >> that were fixed in 1.22, and don't see what versioning a much older >> version of jikes will buy you. I am just fine with a single jikes >> package, although if Jari wants, you could package 1.14 as the Prev >> version simultaneously with 1.22 as the current version (note that there >> is no requirement to do this, though, since it IS harder to maintain two >> disparate versions of the same project). > > > Fair enough. I agree with that point. My packages won't conflict > anyway, so I can keep them to myself. Debian dropped the version > tie-in as well (woody had jikes1.14, sarge had just jikes). > > I drop my objection, and thank all for their responses.
Ok, and thanks for Eric for in depth view. Jari