To chip in..
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> wrote: > Concerning naming, I would propose an explicit separation between daily and > releases with names like > lyx-daily-(stable|trunk) > This naming scheme seems most intuitive for daily builds. For most purposes lyx-daily-stable and lyx-daily-trunk (or lyx-daily-unstable) should suffice. > lyx-release-(stable|beta|alpha) > In my view "release" is extraneous here. We could have instead: lyx-1.6 (for latest stable 1.6.x release; probably forever 1.6.10) lyx (for latest stable release, currently 2.0.0 and soon 2.0.1, while in the future it will stand for 2.1.0; this would update the official Ubuntu LyX, which is just fine) lyx-2.1-alpha (for 2.1 alpha releases) lyx-2.1-beta (for 2.1 beta releases) lyx-2.1-rc (for 2.1 rc releases) This way we have two PPAs and we clearly distinguish from daily builds and releases, while in the PPA description we will clearly explain which binary is intended for daily use, which binary is potentially stable and which one is clearly dangerous and intended for testing only. Mixing lyx-daily-stable and lyx-1.6 or lyx binaries in one PPA makes little sense to me and seems very confusing. We could in principle also keep lyx-1.5 (for latest stable 1.5.x release) lyx-2.0.0 (for an always accessible release of the current stable branch, for people who want to avoid regressions in future stable releases) lyx-2.0.1 (idem) lyx-2.0.2 (idem) etc. but this can be too much and unnecessary. Cheers Liviu > There is indeed no need to catter for 1.6 branch. There is only one stable > branch active at a time. > > JMarc > -- Do you know how to read? http://www.alienetworks.com/srtest.cfm http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/applications/xfce4-dict#speed-reader Do you know how to write? http://garbl.home.comcast.net/~garbl/stylemanual/e.htm#e-mail
