> On Mar 28, 2022, at 11:40 AM, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel
> <freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
> The branches that receive updates (1.2, 1.3, latest) contain the latest
> version of the packages that we have created. I don’t see a reason to add a
> new branch. If we decided to change package file extensions (and possibly
> format), 1.2 and 1.3 would be detached from Latest. And most likely would
> receive few if any updates.
>
> Jim already provides the ‘raw’ files under a couple directories at
> http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/
> <http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/> . They are raw
> mirrors and most are not in package format.
> Oh, I was confused thinking latest was not in package format. It is because
> it is in repositories.
> I see that there is less categories in freedos/files than in the repositories
> however.
> I am very surprised that 1.2 and 1.3 repositories are (still unsure) symlinks
> to latest repository.
> Because in my mind, you have no right to modify 1.2 or 1.3 after they have
> been released.
> But it seems the project don't share this mindset.
I think there is some confusion. The purpose of the repository is to provide
updates. Not to provide the version of the packages that shipped with the
release. For the version that comes with the release, those are on the release
media. Keeping a separate static copy, to me seems like just a waste of space.
Linux distress behave the same way. The online repository provides the newest
version of the packages. When you select to install something from online, it
does not install the old version that would have come with the release. It
installs the newest version available.
:-)
Jerome
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
