Re: version numbering for betas

[Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc cu-portland edu>]

On 21 Feb 2001 04:39:56 +0100, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
> 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.

Thanks, I knew there had to be some sneaky way around that.

> > 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 :)

Would it be inappropraite to post a link a much better explanation that
I could hope to do?  Here's a link to the right section of the Software
Release Practice HOWTO.
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Software-Release-Practice-HOWTO/x43.html


    Greg