Is it possible to have a dnf alias, so when users "dnf install ardour" it will select ardour4 (or whatever the current package is) That could provide some ease-of-install without needing to maintain a meta package.
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:48 PM Nils Philippsen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Brian, > > On Fri, 2015-05-08 at 18:08 +0000, Brian Monroe wrote: > > Looking at the wiki guide the way suggested is to : > > > > The most current version: ardour > > Previous version names: ardour2 (or ardour3.5) > > > > > > This would differ from having ardour be a meta package. > > having the latest version packaged as "ardour" would making introducing > the next major version into stable Fedora releases a hassle. Say ardour > were version 4, then introducing version 5 would require creating > ardour4, obsoleting ardour <= ... so existing users aren't upgraded to > the new version (which may be incompatible). All existing users would > have to get an update just to follow the name change. > > Thinking further about it, having a meta package that only pulls in the > latest ardour major version when it arrives is kind of overkill. The > most simple way is probably just having ardourN packages for each major > version. If, like with the version 3 and 4, the session file formats are > compatible between versions, we can retire the older version in upcoming > Fedora releases, i.e. in the current case, retire ardour3 from Fedora 22 > on. > > Nils > > > 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 > > -- > Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase > Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty > [email protected] nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 > PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011 > >
_______________________________________________ music mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
