On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 10:39:44PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2018/07/29 00:47, Brian Callahan wrote: > > > > On 07/28/18 17:24, Frederic Cambus wrote: > > > Hi ports@, > > > > > > Lynx 2.8.9 stable has finally been released, so here is a diff to > > > update to this version. Unless I'm mistaken, bumping EPOCH is required > > > here so users are updated from lynx-2.8.9pl19 to lynx-2.8.9. > > > > Why not just make it lynx-2.8.9pl20? Does it really matter if upstream > > switched to a rel naming? A user who cares about the version string that > > badly will check it themselves after installation, no?
> Think I prefer EPOCH to pl20 which doesn't match up with anything > version-wise.. I'm not keen on bypassing upstream release version scheme either, so that's why I went with the EPOCH option. If nobody objects I would like to commit the diff as is. Any OKs? > For next time if using 'dev' releases, they should be named 'pre' > (or maybe 'beta' or something) instead of 'pl'. Note taken, will see if staying on stable releases make more sense in the future.
