Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> writes: > Mmm... I really don't think that works for end users though. Someone > who has installed qgis 3.16.12 from last week's installer has no way > of telling that they'll be affected by the bug vs someone who only > just downloaded the installer. There's no way we can put out any > announcement and say "check the about screen and if your version says > .... then you need to update".
I'm not trying to suggest that the plan be changed. The problem here is that what's being released by these binary installers is a packaging system, not the source and in general packaging systems need another place to put a version they can increment when there is a change to the packaging configuration (included patches, build options, etc.). I suspect that because this is "qgis binary release" it isn't being viewed as a packagaging system. As an example, in pkgsrc had we backported a patch for wip, and we ha qgis-3.16.12 and then if we fixed that we'd have qgis-3.16.12nb1 which says that it is a packaging change but the same upstream tarball. As I understand things Debian etc. does the same thing (but the version numbers look different, I think "-N" suffix).
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
