Re: version numbering for betas

[Karl Eichwalder <keichwa gmx net>]

Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc cu-portland edu> writes:

> Why aren't these 1.3 releases?  Isn't this just what 1.3 releases were
> supposed to be for?  People are calling packages "1.4-beta1" which is a
> bit annoying for packaging, since I can't use that as a package version
> number.

Concerning RPM one can work around it; use to make proper use of
'Version:' and '%setup -n':

    Name: xxx
    Version: 1.4beta1

    %setup -q -n %{name}-1.4-beta1

Yes, it's annoying and it would be nice to have the names and versions
you're proposing.

> I end up changing the version in configure, then doing a ./configure
> && make dist.  Even if they're not 1.3 releases, why are they under
> "stable" and not under "testing"?  Sorry if this sounds acusatory,
> it's not meant that way, I just want to know the rationale behind
> abandoning things that GNOME has done in the past.

I guess it's simply lack of info.  Please, write a short article for
developers.gnome.org -- thus we can do better next time :)

-- 
work : ke suse de                          |                   ,__o
     : http://www.suse.de/~ke/             |                 _-\_<,
home : keichwa gmx net                     |                (*)/'(*)