[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: epsilon away from a release

On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 03:27:13PM -0400, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> "Steve M. Robbins" <steven.robbins@videotron.ca> writes:
> > There are "release candidate" tarballs for both autoconf and automake,
> > and I'm about to make a debian package of them for my own purposes.  
> > 
> > I don't believe that these new versions should be uploaded to
> > "unstable", but it would be useful to have .debs widely available for
> > other developers to check that their package will still build.  I
> > wonder if someone is already making available .debs of these alpha
> > versions.  If nobody is already doing this or planning to do this, I
> > will do so.
> > 
> > Comments?
> There's a package of a CVS snapshot from March in
> project/experimental.  You might want to base your alpha version
> on this.  Other than that, I'm waiting for an official, final
> release in order to make an upload to unstable.  Last I heard,
> the autoconf maintainers didn't want alpha releases widely
> distributed, so I've restricted alphas to project/experimental
> and made them only upon request.

It is true that they shouldn't be widely released.  I would not
advocate uploading snapshots to unstable.

However, there is at least some intersection between debian-devel
and readers of the autoconf & automake lists where the release
candidates are announced.  I don't see why such a candidate shouldn't
be packaged on an experimental basis for others to have a poke at.
Probably we should run this idea by the auto-* developers first.

The point is moot for autoconf, however, as 2.50 was just announced!!


by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants

Reply to: