Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > > Upstream is planning on releasing Gnus 5.10.8, and No Gnus > version 0.4, in a couple of days. I am soliciting comments on how > Gnus packaging should be done for Debian. > > Sid already contains No guns 0.3, but sets the version as > 5.10.6+<blargle> . Shipping Gnus 5.10.8 would essentially mean that > people running Sid would have a downgrade, and is probably not > desirable. > > If we ship No Gnus 0.4, the issue is again one of numbering, > the reason upstream skipped 5.10.7 is because of us shipping No gnus, > in part. I would like to prevent these in the future. > > So, we have either forcing people running Sid's Gnus to > downgrade from No Gnus 0.3+ to 5.10.8
Downgrading Gnus from development versions is generally not safe. > of ship an unreleased version and complicate versioning for > future releases. Not a clean path going forward. I am inclined to > continue to ship No Gnus, and hopefully Emacs and Gnus shall > release soon, or at least before etch, and then etch would release > is Gnus 5.11. How about creating two separate packages? 'gnus' get the stable version, and 'gnus-snapshot' (or possibly gnus-beta) get the Gnus CVS trunk? There's still a problem because people using 'gnus' now is actually using the (future) gnus-snapshot package, but maybe that can be solved by clever versioning tricks. I like the emacs21-snapshot packages, maybe a similar naming scheme could be used for Gnus. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
