On Fr, 2011-06-24 at 19:21 +0200, Ove Kåven wrote: > On 06/24/2011 05:55 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > You said that you were using 1.1.99.4. Is that because you wanted a > > properly tagged version or because you need a source .tar.gz? Either > > way, a current snapshot is here: > > http://downloads.syncevolution.org/syncevolution/sources/experimental/syncevolution-1.1.99.4+20110624+SE+0b62402+SYSYNC+92d2f36.tar.gz > > Building an updated package normally involves branching from a release > tag, merging (and updating) packaging work and source code changes from > previous branches, and updating the changelogs and stuff. I've been > reluctant to do that for random untagged snapshots from git. It's boring > work, there's no proper version number to put into the branch names and > changelogs, and it'd just create too much of a mess for me to want to do > it if I don't have to.
Understood. But I need to point out the chicken-and-egg issue: without such testing, I don't know whether I can call a tagged version the release candidate that you were waiting for. For example, the discussion around config naming definitely had to happen before the release candidate. So thanks for helping to break out of that cycle. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
