Am Freitag, 8. Dezember 2006 21:08 schrieb Ian Lynagh: > This will probably have been made with whatever OpenGL was in darcs when > the build was done (the binary distributions come from the nightly > builds). [...]
OK, so in a nutshell: Everything is fine with the binary releases, it can just be the case that different platforms might see different package versions of non-core packages. No big deal to upgrade/downgrade later, given our package system/Cabal. > We should possibly do > something like having only odd second components (e.g. version 2.3 but > not version 2.4) in darcs repos so we can at least spot these unstable > version numbers. Then to do a release you'd push the three patches > Version=2.4; tag 2.4; Version=2.5 > all at once. This makes sense, and it would be good if all packages in darcs.haskell.org/packages agreed on this numbering scheme. One minor question: Who will actually push those three patches and when? Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users