On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:52:57PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote: > Can I disagree? We should not choose the "highest" version, because > this can be the one in experimental (which is wrong as well):
NACK. IMO the one to go is the one with the "highest" version. For the case experimental it can be either good or bad (both (TM)). It is good to choose experimental (wrt unstable) if the version packages in experimental is higher than those available in unstable. It is bad the other way around. The rationale for this is that we should choose the one corresponding to the latest development repository which the developer is using. In general it is not possible to understand which one is, but I think the highest version is a good approximation. I haven't reviewed Adam patch though. If it implements statically experimental > unstable it is not corresponding to such an interpretation. Sorry, but I haven't thought about that since the beginning. Thanks for following up. > However, I still think this is a bug in apt-cache, since I don't see the > rationale for showing firstly testing (and then all the rest). I'm > posting to d-d for wider audience. ACK. FWIW. I would push for the above interpretation of mine also there. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
