On 2016-01-30 06:34, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I did not want to increase the version, as it would mean to indicate a
newer version of cliquer, and it's arguably the same, as far as the
functionality goes.
You could have called it dimacliquer-1.21 or something...
--
You received this message
>> I did not want to increase the version, as it would mean to indicate a
>> newer version of cliquer, and it's arguably the same, as far as the
>> functionality goes.
>
> You could have called it dimacliquer-1.21 or something...
I think that' s what the .p1, .p2, .p are useful for. So
that the
This is now fixed in http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19984 (needs review)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-release" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
On Saturday, January 30, 2016 at 9:28:06 AM UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> How should sage-fix-pkg-checksums then figure out what the right tarball
> is? I see no other way than just guessing...
>
The mapping package <-> tarball is uniquely determined by checksums.ini and
package_version.txt,
On 01/30/2016 05:31 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-01-30 10:32, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> I think that' s what the .p1, .p2, .p are useful for.
> No. The .p1... is for adding patches or changing spkg-install with the
> *same* tarball.
>
The "patch level" or "revision" suffix that all package
