Quoting Jerome Charaoui (2014-01-31 16:12:44)
> Le 2014-01-31 06:36, Daniel James a écrit :
>> Thanks for the reply. I have checked the list above, and only galette 
>> depends on a specific version of libjs-jquery-cookie, in this case 
>> (>= 8).
>> I guess the current version numbering was chosen because the source 
>> package jquery-goodies contains many different libraries, with a 
>> variety of upstream version numbers. Would it be a lot more work to 
>> create a source package for each of the 23 binary packages?
> Well, yes, it would be a lot of work. And I'm quite certain the 
> official javascript packaging team would disagree to split 
> jquery-goodies.

We do not as a team mandate bundling of jQuery addons.

I have no problem with splitting out addons as needed.

> But, I think switching to upstream numbering is still possible. by 
> using an epoch number. The new version number for libjs-jquery-cookie 
> would be 1:1.4.0 (epoch 1) which would be more recent than 8-2 (epoch 
> 0). Generating a binary package with a different version number than 
> the source package is definitely possible.

Whoa - either the package version is relevant or it isn't.

Sounds to me that a bundle package cannot have a version that indicates 
versions of each of the bundled parts, and it is *not* sensible to throw 
an epoch to try please just one piece of the bundle.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list

Reply via email to