On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Gonzalo Odiard <gonz...@laptop.org> wrote: >> >> I am not sure what problem we are trying to solve. If I give you any >> release number > than the latest gtk2 version, won't that solve your >> problem? And if I label that release with 0.96+ in ASLO, won't that >> resolve itself re old Sugar systems? I think the solution may lie in >> simply not making tar balls for gtk2 versions. >> >> -walter >> > > It's true you can just don't publish tarballs of gtk2 versions, > but probably will be confusing for the users. > Should be good if we can agree in a consistent numbers in activities. > If we decide the proposed schema does not works (dotted version for gtk2, > integer for gtk3) we should talk and define a new one. > I like the proposal from Peter, just start with 100 with gtk3 versions > looks sane.
I don't agree re 100+ simply because some activities already have greater than 100 versions (TA, Browse, etc.). We could start at 1000, I suppose. But why not just use even for gtk2 and odd for gtk3? -walter > > Gonzalo > > >> >> -- >> Walter Bender >> Sugar Labs >> http://www.sugarlabs.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Sugar-devel mailing list >> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel