Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Geoffrey Derber <Geoffrey.Derber AT Trinity.edu>]

Eric Sandall wrote:
> Geoffrey Derber said:
>
> > Kind of a request for the future.
> >
> > Can we move towards having all spells be the latest STABLE release, and
> > for devel releases, have second copy of the spell '-devel' on the end.
> >
> > This might require that dependencies be taken care of more like the
> > requires method.  But I think it may be better in the end.
> >
> > This would eliminate the beta mozilla versions, and the beta xfree86,
> > several others.  But I really think unless the person wants to use a
> > beta version, we should not try to force it on them w/ an update.  Have
> > them choose the beta / development branch specifically.  Then it is the
> > end users choice rather than, 'oh we want to use the latest devel
> > version, tough luck if you want to use an older version'
> >
> > Another reason for doing it this way, I'd like to see us return if
> > possible to a point where people can safely update with a cron job and
> > know what they would be getting.
> >
> > Geoff
>
>
> This is how it SHOULD be anyways.  Note that we do have some <spell>-devel
> spells in sections (gimp-devel, for example).  However, sometimes we
> cannot help it for when the author removes all prior versions and/or the
> older versions do not work with the version of X that we have in the
> grimoire.
>
> In general, though, if we can use the 'stable' release, please do, and if
> you want to have the spell at a 'devel/beta' release, create a new spell
> with '-devel' or '-beta' (preferably the former).
>
> -sandalle

The two spells I notice it the most on, usually just one, but recently a 
second, mozilla, up until the 1.4 release recently the stable version 
has been 1.3.1, not the 1.4a not 1.4b, but 1.3.1

And then the xfree86, it's the 4.3.0.1 not the 4.3.99.8.

Neither of those have had the prior packages removed.  Remember, 
'SHOULD' is not the same as 'IS'

Geoff