Re: love 0.9

[Steven Hamilton <oz@scorch.net>]

Miriam Ruiz writes:

> Not really, if you want, we could have it in quite soon. The only real
> issue is to decide on the name of the package and the upgrading path.
>
> Right now, we have love, that provides love.We could add love0.8 that
> provided love0.8. At some point, it's predictable that love1.0 will
> appear, love will have to point to it, and we would have to add
> love0.9.
>
> So the best way might be to have love0.8, love0.9 and stuff, and make
> love a metapackage that always pointed to the last version. I don't
> have it very clear how to move from the current situation to this one
> without changing everithing already in place.
>
> Ideas?

Going by other packages (e.g. SDL) the standard seems to be
<packageName><version> so yes, we'd be looking at love0.9 and love0.8
with a metapackage "love" pointing at the latest. Since the current
version in stable is love0.9 surely it would be quite simple to replace
the current "love" package with a metapackage and change the "love" to
love0.9.

Hum?


-- 
Steven Hamilton
I don't look like two zombies