Re: Guile 1.3 == SO 4
On Tue, Nov 17, 1998 at 11:18:53PM -0800, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> David Welton <davidw@gate.cks.com> writes:
>
> > My take on things is this:
> >
> > Jim B. was releasing guile snapshots to the development community for
> > a while, which were just taht, snapshots. Karl H, apparently thought
> > they would be a good thing to have in Debian, and given all the other
> > alpha and beta software we have, there was certainly nothing wrong
> > with this reasoning. Now, we have a stable Guile release, which is
> > not a snapshot, but instead intended for general public consumption.
> > Seemingly, Jim bumped the SO number before releasing it as 1.3. From
> > his point of view, I think this is all fairly reasonable.
>
> (That's Jim Blandy, not Jim Pick)
>
> Yep. It probably would have been better if guile1.3 was really called
> guile-beta (or something like that) while it was in pre-release mode.
Maybe.. there is plenty of beta software that isn't named anything
special. However, what's done is done...
> You know I'm trying to get everybody to move to guile 1.3 before the
> slink release, as I'm not really maintaining the guile 1.2 packages
> anymore, and would really love to get them out of the release.
Hmmm are you sure that's a good idea? I'm still trying to solidify
the package...
> The guile 1.3 package should really have a libguile4 package (not
> libguile3). Can this be done really soon? I'll even do an NMU if you
> don't have time.
I'll do it this evening, if you want it sooner, go ahead:->
BTW, how long does it take for changelogs with Fixes ..... to clear
the reletive bugs from the system? It would be nice if I could get
accurate information from the system...
Ciao,
--
David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw
Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
Reply to: