Hi, sorry for the late reply, this is a very good question.
I think we should move to dotted version numbers for activities in 0.88, maybe interpreting a version number without a dot as 0.xx. For now and for your specific use case, what about preppending 0.84/0.86 to the activity version number? Regards, Tomeu On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 10:10, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > Hi, > > As I understand it, Sugarlabs wants to keep things simple for users by only > using the equivalent of "major numbers" when versioning Activities. > > I am wondering, however, what version numbers can be expected for potential > future bugfix releases of Browse and Chat targeted 0.84, as it seems to me > that there have been left no natural numbers between latest 0.84-compatible > releases and first 0.85-requiring releases. > > I ask because I would prefer to setup package tracking in Debian, and these > two packages seems impossible to have a newer release by your chosen > numbering scheme. > > > Kind regards, > > - Jonas > > -- > * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt > * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ > > [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > > iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJKuJSXAAoJECx8MUbBoAEhVWsP/RMpzkitqQMg2um/L2AUdAS8 > SiD1QMgMPoO9p43RsjRcgDMPVWN/P6zw2nJYFa9/GoD3thfR8frbad+ZRNiKllyi > KgVV/MstsmOF9zR2drVRlwQXk0RDb/Uo1/Tug11cuLQCl5csvBQT2so9YZQ4zula > 4Pbk4X6Oi8zNOVzdHZXzhcr2ilfEaFhsGL18ILBN732DVo43ZkCExFZFRy6dwprD > q/o3iphNpBk5cnpxAJe6eaph7lY41sXLK12PCgMs1xjXHR+7n/3DfmLWsVT1vjIv > 6PA+dU2V1LWMwYYgMo+/rpC89x1I306nV5lk2s1IdbaTPHgfVm+CREEWFBdWgM9H > 0zXIuE0fngW6qBXoNzTegbwAQYtECqSSY66GdWxgZ/pJ+HIpPU+irreA1CmB6Ypz > nBmc1Ed1L2sHZrXOwUEZQFOCp0TUezNMOprDww1dUTxj1cQUPCqY8/E08/t29w85 > KZeAPMrjvSkkeAUZ46xsJbjy2P+jenVaf0TjSDbZQtLJEvq4vLQ7YHUbkoHv/fnI > HdkJotErMVt+Nv1Pc/kIWFZjZm9GFUqYKhfiyKQsc0cyDFLYTXSxltZDCoyX+gu4 > S8+sLTSstMqz3rS/6YWb3Wa3Xmk9AFAmoKV9oDY5U3yoQY98wXPmtKn7CCceIksw > k5wKwL326UKA+GKEi+IV > =AQmA > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel