sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest
- From: Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest
- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 00:12:08 +1100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 19:36, Benoit PAPILLAULT wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think this "latest" link is just a bad idea that was already discussed.
> Why it is a bad idea?
>
> -> the link is always moving (and it's not even a link)
> -> it's wasting space (since it's not a symlink, but a file copy!)
> -> we don't know if it should be updated for pre-releases or only for
> stable releases
>
If it isn't a link then it isn't worth doing, so having the LATEST_IS_* file
is a good idea.
Personally, if "you" (the person releasing the ISO) are calling it a
prerelease then it should not be also called LATEST.
> I think that it should be replaced by a single file named
> "LATEST_IS_0.7.1". Btw, the ISO 0.7.1 has been announced on several
> mailing list : sm-admin, sm-announce, sm-users. There is a post
> on http://news.sourcemage.org and http://forums.sourcemage.org. I also
> make an annoucement on freshmeat. All those annoucements have a DIRECT
> link to the proper file.
>
Good work
> So, how people belonging to the core sourcemage team STILL download
> "latest" ??? Aren't you all suscribed to sm-admin (we have been told that
> it's for developpers recently)?
I don't mind websites having a "latest" link to the most recent release, but
for a spell author to use "latest" when it is just a link is silly. It isn't
"black or white"/ "good or bad" , at some stage common sense (or lack of it)
is important too.
> Btw, did someone notice the new download area where you can see whole
> filename? ... or am I just wasting my time? :-(
>
> Waiting for comments,
> Benoit PAPILLAULT, ISO Guru
I saw it, I appreciate your efforts.
Hamish
- --
IRC nick: drmoriarty
SMGL co-conspirator
#Do You SMGL!?
# Linux so advanced it may as well be magic!
# http://www.sourcemage.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/nms28fSufZR6424RAphQAJ0QQrOX8IsSVyOnR9MbexaUNRuknwCfSB+F
Usa5FYszqAhJAPGDK6aEqwE=
=3iG6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Eric Sandall, 10/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Hamish Greig, 10/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest, Jason Flatt, 10/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest, Jason Flatt, 10/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 10/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest, Seth Alan Woolley, 10/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest, Hamish Greig, 10/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest, Jason Flatt, 10/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Eric Sandall, 10/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Laurent Wandrebeck, 10/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest, Eric Sandall, 10/31/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Laurent Wandrebeck, 10/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] smgl-latest doesn't point to latest,
Hamish Greig, 10/28/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.