On 05/09/16 13:15, Maciej Sieczka wrote:
W dniu 05.09.2016 o 10:45, Markus Neteler pisze:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Maciej Sieczka <[email protected]> wrote:
W dniu 05.09.2016 o 01:32, Anna Petrášová pisze:
but nothing will change in svn (except for the howto_release.txt), so
can't you just make a new package?
If you asked me - release is meant to be immutable. But please do what
you think is right.
No idea what's right.
The tarball was wrong, the SVN tag is right.
So this is a bit less of an issue then.
What is the best practice for packaging errors? I remember that there
were issues once in a PROJ4 tarball as well. But I don't recall how
they dealt with it.
A new full release of 6 would be a major PITA, with hours of work for
me which I just spent recently on this topic.
Yup, the PITA factor should never be understimated; but easily is from a
distance.
Thanks for the new tarball. It builds fine. Hopefully nobody picked up
the old one for their builds.
I think this is the major issue. Packagers who packaged immediately
after the announcement might have used the tar ball.
We should at least announce on all lists the fact that there was an
error in the tarball and that it is now corrected.
Moritz
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
