You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by Alan Knowles <al...@akbkhome.com> on 2004/10/09 03:36:12 UTC
Debian Logic (was Re: What's the estimate delivery date of Subversion
1.2?)
Getting a bit off topic -
Does anyone know whats the logic behind calling the experimental release
1.0.8+1.1.0rc4-1, what wrong with just releasing 1.1.0? - it's beyond
confusing (and since subversion is such a brease to build - thanks to
some very good code), I dont usually use the packages, (although it
would be nice to..)
Regards
Alan
Ross Boylan wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 07:39:06AM +0200, Konrad Rosenbaum wrote:
>
>
>>On Thursday 07 October 2004 02:30, Erik Anderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm just holding my breath until Debian removes it from the 'experimental'
>>>category... (http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/subversion.html)
>>>
>>>
>>Don't hold your breath for Debian, unless you want to suffocate... ;-)
>>
>>
>> Konrad
>>
>>
>>
>
>Huh? It's already in various flavors of debian.
>I'm not sure what you mean by "experimental"; ordinarily it refers to
>a branch that is outside of stable/testing/unstable. It's been in the
>regular branches for awhile, and should be in the next official
>release.
>
>$ apt-show-versions -a subversion
>subversion 1.0.6-2 install ok installed
>No stable version
>subversion 1.0.6-2 testing
>subversion 1.0.6-2 unstable
>subversion/testing uptodate 1.0.6-2
>
>The page you refer to simply shows that the latest version (1.0.8) is
>held up for various reasons. Earlier versions are out.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Debian Logic (was Re: What's the estimate delivery date of Subversion 1.2?)
Posted by Tristan Seligmann <tr...@quotemaster.co.za>.
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 12:20:09PM -0500, Kevin Puetz wrote:
> The name 1.0.8+1.1.0rc4-1 is a bit harder to justify; you want it to compare
> as greater than 1.0.8-?, but less than 1.1.0-1 (which would normally the
> number for the first full release into unstable). I think the more common
> choice would have been to call it 1.1.0-0rc4 or similar (with the 0 version
> putting it in the right place). The maintainer would have to be around to
> answer that one, if the changelog doesn't make it clear :-)
Actually, I think it's fairly common to package a newer upstream version
in experimental as <current unstable version>+<new version>.
--
Tristan Seligmann
Software Engineer / Network Administrator
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Debian Logic (was Re: What's the estimate delivery date of Subversion 1.2?)
Posted by Kevin Puetz <pu...@puetzk.org>.
It's fairly common in debian to put a new upstream into 'experimental' for a
brief while, especially if the packaging scripts needed some changes. In
this case, it may also have been done because the maintainer wanted to let
1.0.8 make it from unstable to testing (ie, into the upcoming sarge
release), before replacing the version in unstable (which would have
restarted the shakedown period). So that's probably why it didn't go
directly into unstable.
<'unstable' vs 'testing'>
Normally, a package version must be in unstable for at least N amount of
time (varies according to various policies) without having bugs of severity
>= normal filed against it before it is allowed to propagate into testing.
Manual override is possible, but in this case since testing is about to
become sarge, exceptions to the rules are harder to come by.
</'unstable' vs 'testing'>
The name 1.0.8+1.1.0rc4-1 is a bit harder to justify; you want it to compare
as greater than 1.0.8-?, but less than 1.1.0-1 (which would normally the
number for the first full release into unstable). I think the more common
choice would have been to call it 1.1.0-0rc4 or similar (with the 0 version
putting it in the right place). The maintainer would have to be around to
answer that one, if the changelog doesn't make it clear :-)
Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 11:36:12AM +0800, Alan Knowles wrote:
>> Getting a bit off topic -
>>
>> Does anyone know whats the logic behind calling the experimental release
>> 1.0.8+1.1.0rc4-1, what wrong with just releasing 1.1.0? - it's beyond
>> confusing (and since subversion is such a brease to build - thanks to
>> some very good code), I dont usually use the packages, (although it
>> would be nice to..)
>>
>> Regards
>> Alan
>>
> My, that does seem obscure. At a guess, it's 1.0.8 + some code
> from later. Further guess: there was concern that 1.1, since it has
> big changes, might have some brokenness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Debian Logic (was Re: What's the estimate delivery date of Subversion 1.2?)
Posted by Ross Boylan <Ro...@stanfordalumni.org>.
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 11:36:12AM +0800, Alan Knowles wrote:
> Getting a bit off topic -
>
> Does anyone know whats the logic behind calling the experimental release
> 1.0.8+1.1.0rc4-1, what wrong with just releasing 1.1.0? - it's beyond
> confusing (and since subversion is such a brease to build - thanks to
> some very good code), I dont usually use the packages, (although it
> would be nice to..)
>
> Regards
> Alan
>
My, that does seem obscure. At a guess, it's 1.0.8 + some code
from later. Further guess: there was concern that 1.1, since it has
big changes, might have some brokenness.
A sort of related thread is at
http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/servlets/BrowseList?list=dev&by=thread&from=234097
Actually, grabbing the diff file from qa.debian, the changelog says
+subversion (1.0.8-1) unstable; urgency=high
+
+ * New upstream release.
+ * CAN-2004-0749: mod_authz_svn fails to protect metadata
+ * Minor build system changes so we can easily support subversion 1.1.x.
That's from http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/s/subversion/subversion_1.0.8-1.diff.gz
I don't know why that merited the name complication.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org