Stephan Kulow (coolo@suse.de) wrote:
Am 05.11.2012 19:45, schrieb Adam Spiers:
Stephan Kulow (coolo@suse.de) wrote:
On 05.11.2012 14:31, Adam Spiers wrote:
It's not enough for this wiki page to document the current (latest) versioning schemes - the old versioning schemes existing in several repositories, and will continue to cause confusion for people like me unless we document a summary of the history behind the changes. I don't want other people to have to waste as much time on this as I have.
Hmm, isn't having the history next to the state confusing too?
Not if it's written clearly ;-)
Also, if the policy is to rename gem_1_0 packages each time they're updated, then the history behind this is directly relevant to the status quo.
Hmm, they are not renamed.
I think we are both getting confused by each other's vague wording ;-) You said:
We didn't rename all gem_1_0 packages yet, but we're going there whenever we update a package.
That's the renaming I was referring to. Maybe I misled you by using the words 'each time'. Please can you explain exactly what you mean by the above sentence?
You have rubygem-foo and you updated it from 1.0 to 2.0. And if you find that something still requires 1.0.*, you create a rubygem-foo-1_0 from the last rubygem-foo sources.
Yes, I understood that, although I still don't see a good reason for it[1].
If you find something requires 1.0.5, you create a rubygem-foo-1_0_5 and leave out the 1_0
I don't understand this - is there a typo? What does "leave out the 1_0" mean? Thanks, Adam [1] http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-ruby/2012-11/msg00035.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+owner@opensuse.org