On 07/30/18 10:58, Frederic Cambus wrote:
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 10:39:44PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2018/07/29 00:47, Brian Callahan wrote:
On 07/28/18 17:24, Frederic Cambus wrote:
Hi ports@,
Lynx 2.8.9 stable has finally been released, so here is a diff to
update to this version. Unless I'm mistaken, bumping EPOCH is required
here so users are updated from lynx-2.8.9pl19 to lynx-2.8.9.
Why not just make it lynx-2.8.9pl20? Does it really matter if upstream
switched to a rel naming? A user who cares about the version string that
badly will check it themselves after installation, no?
Think I prefer EPOCH to pl20 which doesn't match up with anything
version-wise..
I'm not keen on bypassing upstream release version scheme either, so
that's why I went with the EPOCH option. If nobody objects I would
like to commit the diff as is. Any OKs?
No objections from me.
~Brian
For next time if using 'dev' releases, they should be named 'pre'
(or maybe 'beta' or something) instead of 'pl'.
Note taken, will see if staying on stable releases make more sense in
the future.
