On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 at 12:20:28 +0200, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
>
> >There were patches to wmbiff recently. What should I do? Write a patch
> >changing the #define version x.y for wmbiff only and announcing that
> >I'm releasing a new wmbiff?
>
> Or just tag the repository with a tag wmbiff-x.y when finished
> merging all the patches and changed the #define in wmbiff to a new
> version. That's what we can call a release: some marked point in the
> repo which can be identified with a version number.
Ok. I can do that and will do that if that would help how distros
want to do things.
> >Let's say today I tag the dockapps.git repo as wmbiff-2.0, how would
> >that help someone?
>
> I think it would help Alexey or Kix to know that they should update
> the wmbiff package in their distros and (reproducibly) can get a
> revision from the repository that contains exactly version 2.0 of
> wmbiff. If the next day some patches to wmvolman are merged and
> tagged with wmvolman-1.15 they know that they only have to update
> the wmvolman package and can again get the corresponding revision
> from the repo. So even if the tarball from the repo contains all the
> dockapps they are still versioned separately and one can use them
> both together or separately as they wish. The administrative
> overhead may be a bit higher but not much: instead of just using
> tags like dockapps-3.0, dockapps-3.1, etc. you would use tags for
> independent apps but the work involved is the same (merge patches,
> tag repo).
I had the impression Alexey wanted more than that because of the
separate tarball being uploaded somewhere story.
But if all people want is some kind of notification:
"Look, wmbiff changed recently and there's a new version x.y for it.
The repo has its directory along with others, deal with that."
and having the dockapps.git tag playing the role of a notifier, then
that's also fine.
> But as I said I don't use the dockapps repo, so it's only a proposal
> and you are free to decide how you do your work and packagers can
> also say if they like this proposal or not. I just though this might
> be an acceptable compromise for both parties.
I'd like to have some kind of confirmation from packagers that this
could have a chance to work.
I hope I'm not making things more difficult than they already are,
dockapps.git was meant to simplify things.
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to wmaker-dev-unsubscr...@lists.windowmaker.org.
