Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-gnome (216 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-gnome] Update GNOME:STABLE to 2.20, fate of GNOME:UNSTABLE
- From: Michael Wolf <maw@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:21:18 -0500
- Message-id: <1191424878.4172.4.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Mon, 2007-01-10 at 11:59 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
> Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
>
> > > What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21,
> > > there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for
> > > some time.
> > >
> > I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the
> > longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade
> > (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary
> > packages for unstable GNOME releases.
>
> Yes. But is there any 2.21 package already? If not, we should stop/drop
> G:U to not waste resources having exactly the same in G:S and G:U.
>
> We could revive it whenever we'll start with 2.21.
I don't think we should drop G:U, but I am planning to repopulate it
with packages from Factory soon, and to move GNOME development into G:U,
so we can work on annotating .spec files and the like soon.
A different mail that I'm about to send has the details.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 15:35 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
>
> > > What about GNOME:UNSTABLE? If anybody volunteer to start update to 2.21,
> > > there is a chance. Otherwise, we can freeze or drop this repository for
> > > some time.
> > >
> > I think it makes a lot of sense to use G:U for 2.21/2.23/etc. In the
> > longer term, we should get coordinated with the GNOME Build Brigade
> > (http://live.gnome.org/BuildBrigade) to do compilation tests and binary
> > packages for unstable GNOME releases.
>
> Yes. But is there any 2.21 package already? If not, we should stop/drop
> G:U to not waste resources having exactly the same in G:S and G:U.
>
> We could revive it whenever we'll start with 2.21.
I don't think we should drop G:U, but I am planning to repopulate it
with packages from Factory soon, and to move GNOME development into G:U,
so we can work on annotating .spec files and the like soon.
A different mail that I'm about to send has the details.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |