On Friday, 16 September 2016 23:04:38 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Luigi Toscano
> 
> <luigi.tosc...@tiscali.it> wrote:
> > On Friday, 16 September 2016 22:52:32 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> It seems that KDE PIM, despite being part of the Applications release,
> >> doesn't align it's internal version numbers with the rest of the
> >> Applications release.
> >> 
> >> This causes issues - as we've received complaints about various
> >> products (all being PIM products) missing versions on bugs.kde.org,
> >> due to this mismatch. It's also confusing for users.
> >> 
> >> Can PIM please fall in line with the rest of Applications?
> > 
> > I don't think this is required: many pieces of Applications uses a
> > different internal version. I'd really like to have this not enforced.
> 
> I'd like to see it enforced.
> See https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335654#c7 for the confusion
> created (and Sysadmin effort taken).

I understand it takes effort, but I strongly disagree with the enforcing.

> 
> It also means that the process of releasing applications can't be
> automated to create all the necessary versions, so someone has to do
> it manually.
> And chances are, it ain't going to be the application maintainer.

The versions are defined in each repository; they can be extracted (by the CI, 
by some other script) and compared with the list of available version for each 
component. I.e. it can be automated even with different internal versions.

-- 
Luigi

Reply via email to