Re: GNOME updater

[Efraim Flashner]

On Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:11:55 +0100
address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:

> Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> skribis:
> 
> > A for gnome-3, the 3.19 series AFAIK is the beta/development releases for
> > 3.20, so would we want to update to those numbers?  
> 
> Good point, we probably don’t want those.
> 
> Fixed in c499125, which leads to a shorter list:
> 
>[snip]
 
it might need a bit more work. For example, vte is at 0.40.0 and current
upstream is 0.43.0, but presumably there is a 0.42.x release in there
somewhere. Or at least for gnome-mines and -terminal, I'm sure there's a 3.18
release between our 3.16.x and upstream 3.19.x.

I tried a bit at the logic but wasn't able to quickly figure something out.
As a test at-spi2-atk in gtk.scm can be upgraded to 2.18.3.

> > Also, if we don't want to use those releases, we should check if the
> > other packages also use the odd (version minor-version) numbers as a
> > symbol for beta/rc releases.  
> 
> This is checked for GNU packages already, and I assume there’s no notion
> of “unstable” releases on repos such as PyPI and CRAN?

Could this also be a problem for GNU packages? If we didn't update to the
latest release before they put out a new development version?

> 
> Thanks for your feedback!
> 
> Ludo’.

Always happy to help :)

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <address@hidden>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

pgpb2e0JFluJJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature