Hello Brian, David, On 2013-12-14, Brian Drummond wrote: > I want to get to a point where I have a "stable" edition on > ghdl-updates and I believe I'm close; next couple of days will see a > few more patches for "low hanging" bugs then I will have a revision > that can form the basis for a set of releases; not just Debian, but > Mac and others.
Ok. It was not previously clear to me that you were planning to provide stable releases. This is good news and it will certainly make things much easier for me. > Development will continue but the "download" versions can be > synchronised to that, and only critical patches backported to it. > IMO that would be a good starting point for Debian too. Agreed. I now plan to do the following: * Make an intermediate Debian package based on a Sourceforge snapshot and keep Debian-specific patching to a minimum. * Once you have a stable edition, I will switch the Debian package to the stable release as baseline. That could be a good candidate for the next Debian release. On 2013-12-15, David Koontz wrote: > Brian, Tristan and I have had email exchanges on the suitability of > venues and have agreed SourceForge is suitable for purpose. The > initial purpose was to be able to deliver a current ghdl to Linux > distributions with requirements to target specific gcc releases. That clarifies things. At first it was not clear to me whether Sourceforge was going to be the new place to "get GHDL", or only a storage for pending patches. I now understand that there is consensus that Brian's branch is the leading GHDL branch. On 2013-12-14, Brian Drummond wrote: > The move to 0.31 is simply intended to delineate 4.8 builds from 4.7 > builds. Thus I would like, if we agree, for all 4.8 builds to be 0.31 > (with apologies to Tristan for "wasting" a release number). Version 0.31 is fine as far as I am concerned. The only reason why I still referred to version 0.30 is because I did not understand that all activity had moved to Sourceforge. A Debian package can not change the version number of its upstream baseline, so a Gna-based package would have been stuck at 0.30. This is resolved if I switch to Sourceforge. Thanks for clearing this up, Joris.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
