Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Jeremy Blosser (emrys)" <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>]

On May 08, Arwed von Merkatz [v.merkatz AT gmx.net] wrote:
> On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 09:12:27PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
> > On May 07, Arwed von Merkatz [v.merkatz AT gmx.net] wrote:
> > > Now for the actual versioned spell. The essential differences between
> > > the spells we currently have:
> > > - some spells default to stable version, some to cvs version
> > ...
> > > What I'd like to see:
> > > - spell asks which version to use, always defaulting to the stable
> > >   version
> > 
> > I agree when the options are just "stable release" and "daily snapshot",
> > but what about spells with active stable, devel/beta, and cvs branches?  
> > In
> > those cases the devel branch can at times pass the stable branch in
> > stability as well as features, and we don't necessarily do our users 
> > favors
> > by just following what can be arbitrary version schemes.
> 
> Then the user wanting those features can choose the devel version and
> be done with it. No spell should default to cvs/svn (unless that's the
> only way to get it of course) because we can't give _any_ guarantees
> that those trees will build/be compatible with other stuff.

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".

Attachment: pgpfBO25uTvyc.pgp
Description: PGP signature