On 1/11/2011 2:30 AM, Alexander Kanevskiy wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Selbak, Rolla N
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/10/11 9:27 PM, "Zhu, Peter J"<[email protected]> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Arjan van de Ven [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 1:23 PM
To: Zhu, Peter J
Cc: Selbak, Rolla N; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [meego-commits] 11716: Changes to Trunk:Testing/powertop
On 1/10/2011 7:06 PM, Zhu, Peter J wrote:
Why fork two powertop? We never fork CORE packages.
For powertop, I don't understand we need old top if you would like
new
features of latest powertop
Rolla suggested it for one release as a transition, just in case there
are bugs with the new code......
New version always might have bugs. Please just use new version or hold
on until new version is good enough.
I already talked to Arjan about this in length.
Please accept this Peter.
Forking is because the new powertop is a complete re-engineering of
powertop, and is in Beta stages, which for our purposes is good enough.
Keeping the old powertop around is for QA since they might need it for
diagnostics, and I don't want to hinder their process (they're already
pressured enough).
It might be better to do it in a way how old compat packages are done
e.g. in Fedora
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name
So, in that way powertop package would be updated to 2.x-beta, and new
package powertop1 as a temporary until we satisfied with 2.x
a whole new package for one week? do you know how much paperwork that
involves in this project??
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
