On 26/10/10 at 22:05 -0500, Tom wrote: > Package: ruby1.9.1 > Version: 1.9.2.0-1 > > So Ruby 1.9.2 is now in the Debian package ruby1.9.1. In the mean time > there is a Debian package named ruby1.9 that seems to be abandoned. > For the Ruby 1.8 branch there is a package called ruby1.8 (aka ruby) > which always has the latest 1.8.x version of Ruby. > > What is the logic of having a ruby1.9 package and a ruby1.9.1 package? > What is the logic of packaging Ruby 1.9.2 in ruby1.9.1? > Why not just use ruby1.9 for the latest Ruby 1.9.x release? > What will the package name be for Ruby 1.9.3, 1.9.4, 1.9.5, etc? Are > those going to have their own packages or are they also going to be in > 1.9.1? > > I have searched the web for an answer without any luck. I'm sure many > people would like to understand the logic of future packaging or at > least the logic of how things got to be where they are today.
This is partially answered in http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/blog/?p=566 In ruby1.9.1, "1.9.1" is the ruby compatibility version. You can see it as the SONAME, even if I'm not completely sure whether it matches the definition of SONAME exactly. (I don't think that anybody knows, really ;) Ruby 1.9.3 will be packaged as ruby1.9.1 if 1.9.3 stays compatible with 1.9.1 (which is the case for 1.9.2). And as ruby1.9.3 if not (which would require a painful migration in Debian, like the ruby1.9 -> ruby1.9.1 one) ruby1.9 isn't abandonned: it was tracking the 1.9.0 branch in lenny. And it won't be part of squeeze. Can I close this bug? - Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
