On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 11:17 +0200, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Friday 15 September 2006 15:31 schrieb Stanislav Brabec:
Hallo Build Service maintainers.
We are just discussing on creating of Build Service projects for GNOME.
Possible structure is:
GNOME:GNOME-UNSTABLE GNOME:GNOME216
Hm, that would mean when there is a stable Gnome 2.18 all people needs to change their repository URLs ?
We do not want to host two stable releases by default, if they are backward compatible, so that would mean that you remove 216 and add 218 at some point of time.
Yes, I think we should never handle more than 2 releases at one time.
IMHO this is not a good idea, I would stick with a :STABLE and :UNSTABLE
Yes, I think so too, if people are subscribed to GNOME-STABLE we can just define the channel via its description properly. If they want a stable, consistent gnome with security updates they can stick to the released product. They will also see in the updater its a massive change and if they went to the trouble to subscribe to the GNOME-STABLE channel they probably want the latest anyhow.
GNOME:EXTRAS
Maybe there will be more projects or the final structure will be different.
Please comment suggested letter case and use "-" or "_" - whether to use GNOME:216, GNOME:GNOME216, GNOME:Gnome216, GNOME:GNOME-2.16 or GNOME:GNOME_2_16 to conform naming scheme of other projects in the Build Service.
We just had KDE:KDE3 and KDE:KDE4 yet (because they are incompatible and are installable in parallel). So when you want to copy this style you would get
GNOME:GONME2 GNOME:UNSTABLE
I don't think this is very discoverable GNOME:GNOME2-UNSTABLE maybe.
-JP
--
JP Rosevear