Hi, Tomas Volf <[email protected]> skribis:
> So, the question is, do we want some rules for the naming and versioning > of the packages (e.g., $pkg is any *released* version, and $pkg-next is > *any* version, often newer, possibly git snapshot or a release > candidate)? Or do you feel this would be governance overreach, it > should stay strictly up to the packagers and we should just document > that users who do not want release candidates should just always pin > versions of everything? I think the spirit was that “-next” (as a package name) was for unreleased versions or version control snapshots; good examples of this are ‘guile-next’ and ‘emacs-next’. For released versions, we should keep the name unchanged IMO. Examples: [email protected], gcc-toolchain@15, openmpi@5, [email protected], etc. Ludo’.
