Baruch Even wrote: > Avi, > > Can you please decide on a normal version number for KVM? I currently > use 0.0.2 in order to be able to use later a proper version number, If > I'd use 2 now than any other sane version later such as 1.0 will be > lower and I'll have to use a prefix to fix that. It would be nice if you > could just use normal version numbers from the start so the Debian > version number will be the same as your version number. > >
Well, I'd have thought that the natural numbers are a perfectly sane numbering scheme. However, I'll bow to tradition and the next release will be 0.3. > Some other issues I had with packaging were clean targets that are > either missing or incomplete. You can take a look at the .diff.gz file > that is in http://people.debian.org/~baruch/kvm/ to see all the changes > I needed to do to the package to build it. It is rather messy right now > but you might be able to get some things you can incorporate in order to > make packaging easier. > My current tree has fixes for most of the problems. I'll look at the clean targets (why are they necessary for packaging?) -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
