Looking at the wiki guide the way suggested is to : <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name>
The most current version: ardour Previous version names: ardour2 (or ardour3.5) This would differ from having ardour be a meta package. On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:55 AM Martin Tarenskeen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 8 May 2015, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > > >> - Move version 2 to its own ardour2 package. This would get it > >> re-reviewed but I guess that's a mere formality. > >> - Reuse the ardour package as a meta-package which simply requires the > >> latest versioned package. > >> - Retire ardour3. > >> > >> What do you think? > > > > > > I think retiring ardour3 at this point is too early - I for one am > > still adjusting to the ardour4 interface. > > > There should be some consistency in the naming and versioning of packages. > A crazy example is rosegarden: Now version 14.02 and the name is ... > rosegarden4 :-) > > -- > > MT > > _______________________________________________ > music mailing list > [email protected] > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
_______________________________________________ music mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
