Le Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:38:07 +0200, Tomasz Melcer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> Dnia Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:26:38 +0200 > Dominique Michel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał(a): > > > Well, this last one make sens to me. But I am still thinking at 3.0.5 > > is not good. 3.0.4 have been here from a vary long time and this > > devel release will not be a bugfix release but add some new > > functionality. Why not 3.1.0 in this case? Or something as 3.0.100 > > before a stable 3.1.0? > > I'd like to suggest 3.1.(-1). Firstly, it makes sense as a release > before 3.1.0 (from the math point). Secondly, I am curious how > would the debian package maintainer handle this ^_^. Thirdly, if you > want to put another revision between 3.1.-1 and 3.1.0, it would of > course be 3.1.-1/2... > In this case, 3.1.0_rc1 (or 3.1.0_pre1) will be better. We can put other revisions with 3.1.0_rc2 and so on. The stable release will be 3.1.1 It is a discussion on gentoo-dev list about it those days. In short, xyz-1_rc1 is valid, but xyz-1_rc1_pre1 is not and will be removed without merci. Some devs including the ones from the council don't want multiple suffix in ebuild names. I am not sure about the 3.1-1, but 3.1.-1/2 will not work. "/" is not allowed in filenames, it is for directories. Even "\" will not work with portage. Ciao, Dominique -- Dominique Michel -- N.B.: Tous les emails que je reçois sont filtrés par spamassassin avant de me parvenir. _______________________________________________ fvwm-crystal-users mailing list fvwm-crystal-users@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/fvwm-crystal-users
