Scott Kostyshak wrote: > Just an update for those who have not been following the other > conversations, and also a question: > > beta2 has been tagged, and the tars have been posted. We have not > formally released it because we are still trying to make it so that it > is possible to compile on Windows from the self-contained archive. There > is a problem with extracting the tar on Windows, so I have just sent Uwe > a zip file containing the same files that the tar contains.
I would formulate it differently: There is a problem with extracting the tar with the tool Uwe used. There are many utilities that support tar, and I know that at least one (GNU tar on cygwin or from GnuWin32) can extract the archive correctly. Maybe others understand it as well. > If the zip file extracts correctly and Uwe can compile for Windows, does > this mean that we should release beta2 as long as we post the zip file > and in the email announcement we recommend the zip file if compiling on > Windows? I'd do that. > Or because the tar has issues with being extracted on Windows, > we must move to beta3 which hopefully (still not confirmed) would > produce a tar that can be extracted correctly with the Windows build? A > separate question is does it matter that the 'make lyxdist' command for > beta2 did not produce the zip file that would be posted as beta2? IMHO it does not matter. The important thing is that the files contained in the zip and the tar are identical. How this is checked (manually or by creating both with a Makefile rule) is not important. Also, I would consider the tag in git the authorative source. I does not say anything about tar packages. I think it is the jopb of the releases manager to ensure that the published source archives are identical with the tagged git source. > It seems to me that although it is indicative of an inexperienced > release manager, the best thing would be to move to beta3, and confirm > with Uwe before posting the files that the archive can be extracted and > that the Windows build succeeds. I don't have a strong opinion on this > though. I don't think it is needed. Using the better format for the next release (I hope there will not be a beta 3) is good, but not required for beta2. Georg
