On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Stewart Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Different packages that conflict (or, if packaging is done really well, > can be installable side-by-side). > > This is like the postgresql packages that allow you to stay on an older > version, and like MySQL (debian) packages. > > Basically, we get to keep doing stable releases of drizzle7 while at the > same time having stable releases of drizzle7.1 and distros don't have to > choose which one they ship - they can ship both and have a default or > people can choose.
Ok, so first things first, you're saying that our next version (and what we should already have done with the beta's!) will be drizzle7.1-2012.0x.xx. Fair enough. I don't see significant harm in this, but don't see it as really useful either since people can't really install two versions of our packages side by side. (Distros could, if they wanted, keep both drizzle-2011.xx and drizzle-2012.xx available in the same repo, and a user could ask to install some specific older version and pin it. But I know they won't do that even if it's possible.) But it's good enough: let's just continue according to plan. Can we use the new naming already for the next beta? Should I file the wrong name as a bug? henrik -- [email protected] +358-40-8211286 skype: henrik.ingo irc: hingo www.openlife.cc My LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=9522559 _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
