Re: gEDA-user: gEDA/gaf devel snapshot 1.5.4-20090830 - fedora testpackages

[Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh.goorah@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Wojciech Kazubski<wk0@xxxxx> wrote:
>
> Why libgeda and libgeda-devel packages have old style version number (20090830) instead of new 1.5.4?
>
> Wojciech
>

I did a mistake in the past and now I'm paying the price :)

Well the mistake was that before gEDA's stable release was made
public, gEDA snapshots are versioned as their date of release. For
Fedora packages, I opted for the same style, instead of 0.20090830 i.e
0.20090830 < 20090830

But since I didn't do it, now with the new gEDA versions 1.*
20090830 > 1*

which means YUM will not update to the stable release.

This is case one.

Case two is geda-* subpackages are bundled into a big tarball with a
new name "gEDA-gaf". That said, gEDA-gaf sub packages should
replace(obsoletes) all the current fedora packages flawlessly. My new
set of gEDA-gaf packages does this job and at the same time opt for
the new version naming 1.*. But namings for libgeda and libgeda-devel
remained the same.

I have the intention to update the fedora stable repositories (F-10
and F-11) when 1.6 comes out (assuming gEDA-gaf passes fedora package
review). This is a very delicate matter and I'm not taking the risks
to create a RPM dependency help when the user will do "yum update".

Hence, I kept the old version naming for libgeda and libgeda-devel so
that 20081230 < 20090830 for example. At least for now. Once gEDA-gaf
fedora packages obsoletes the fedora geda-* packages, I will use a new
Epoch for libgeda and libgeda-devel so that both will be versionned to
1.* later on.

I want to do things step by step and avoid breakage at all cost which
might eat my time.

I hope I answered you.

Chitlesh


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user