https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678559
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678559#c5 Michael Hutchinson <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED InfoProvider|[email protected] | --- Comment #5 from Michael Hutchinson <[email protected]> 2011-03-16 23:53:32 UTC --- I can't think of any problem with changing the package ID, but I have a couple of concerns about defaulting to side-by-side behaviour. Firstly, apps using the system "mono" such as MD will almost invariably be better off if Current and /usr/bin/mono point to the most recent release, not the most recent install. The main reason I can think of to install older versions over newer versions is for checking compatibility for a specific app - not to make it the new default. We need to make it really easy for people to uninstall older Monos without having to use a terminal or keep the original dmg around indefinitely, else disk usage (and the numbers of runtimes visible in MD) are going increase substantially over time, and the vast majority of users don't care about having older runtimes around (I've only ever cared a couple of times, and I'm not even a typical user). It seems to me like we're going to make things harder for most users just to make it easier for a few edge cases. If we do insist on proliferating runtimes, maybe a compromise would be just to have 2.6.x, 2.8.x, 2.10.x, instead of 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, 2.6.3, 2.6.4, 2.6.5, 2.6.7, 2.8, 2.8.1, 2.8.2, 2.10, 2.10.1... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
