[SM-Discuss] How to handle multi-version spells
Sergey A. Lipnevich
sergey at sourcemage.org
Wed May 11 23:26:42 EDT 2005
I agree with Jeremy. More often than not "stable" means "stale." That's
how open source seems to work, everyone likes the new stuff :-).
Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
>>I'm not talking about a CVS version, I'm talking about a released devel
>>version, such as mutt 1.5.9. It is *more* compatible with other stuff than
>>the "stable" 1.4.x branch because 1.4.x is so old (1.4.x tries to require
>>older auto tools than we even ship right now, but our build fudges around
>>calling them the way that would error out). There's several distros that
>>only ship mutt 1.5.x and left 1.4.x in the dirt some time ago. Yes, this
>>is the mutt dev's fault for taking so long to get around to cutting 1.6,
>>but this is exactly what I mean by "arbitrary version schemes".
>I still don't see why the devel version should be the default. I've been
>using mutt 1.4 for ages and don't have any problems with it.
>A user who wants to use 1.5 can still choose it.
More information about the SM-Discuss