On Feb 19, 2014, at 6:51 AM, Derek Atkins <warl...@mit.edu> wrote: > John Ralls <jra...@ceridwen.us> writes: > >>> I think keeping around history is a good thing. >>> Disk is cheap. >>> Just mark it an archive and add a README to the current location(s) >> >> As I said, the history is preserved in git. > > It's not quite the same as "release tarballs".
Right. It's better. Much better, since it has the development context. A tarball is just a snapshot. > >> With the old collections on www.gnucash.org and ftp.gnome.org (and its >> mirrors) we run the risk of someone finding the collection and >> thinking that we’re dead, that GnuCash isn’t releasing any more. If >> you *really* want to serve those old tarballs, at least consolidate >> them on SF and adjust the links in the old news articles. > > Adding a prominent README file, or changing the directory name to > "archive", or even adding a file named This.In.An.Old.Archive would also > inform someone that it's an archive and provide a pointer for where to > find the actual current sources. > > People aren't THAT dumb. Or at least I'd like to think that. ;) You could do that with www.gnucash.org, but master.gnome.org (the developer side of ftp.gnome.org) is highly automated and protected. I don't know that I can insert non-release files. Besides, it's rather hard to argue that gnucash belongs there in any form, since we're not part of Gnome. But why? If you insist on having all of the releases available, shouldn't they all be available from the same place so that they're easy to find? Regards, John Ralls _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
