[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Whether tis nobler to break backwards compat or upstream compat...

On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 08:18 -0700, Shahms King wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 11:14 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Shahms King (shahms shahms com) said: 
> > > One of the packages I maintain in Extras (python-quixote) just released
> > > the next stable version (2.0).  This version is not (entirely) backwards
> > > compatible with the current 1.2 version and is not parallel installable.
> > 
I think tradition has been to package (2.0) as python-quixote and if
someone needed python-quixote-1.x to make a python-quixote1 package
unless upstream has made the decision to make things parallel
installable (as in gtk2 vs gtk+).

Witness the fact that we have php rather than php5 for instance.

> > Does anything currently use it that would need ported?
> > 
> > Bill
> Nothing in Extras, but it's still a rude thing to do to anyone who was
> using it ... (but is a relatively new package...)

Since this was put in so recently (past month, right?) I'd move FC3 and
FC4 to python-quixote 2.0.  If someone needs quixote-1.2 it can be added
as a python-quixote1 package.


_________________  Attraction's easy; love is hard  ______________________
     t  o  s  h  i  o  @  t  i  k  i  -  l  o  u  n  g  e  .  c  o  m
                                                               GA->ME 1999

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]