Re: Release info is not really correct
Laura Arjona Reina <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> El 27/06/17 a las 23:03, Holger Wansing escribió:
> > It seems that the implemented logic has never worked correctly (for the time
> > between x.0 and x.1 release).
> > I have attached a patch which would work.
> > Another approach would need one more entity which is probably not wanted,
> > since it makes the whole thing more and more complicated (entity-wise).
> > I can commit my proposal myself, if you want...
> mmm maybe what is wrong is to set <current_initial_release> to 9, and
> it should be 9.0?
> I've seen that for the Squeeze cycle we were using 7.0 for
> "current_initial_release", and when we released Jessie, we changed to
> 8 instead of 8.0:
I didn't check how it was for Squeeze, only checked Jessie. And there it
was also set "current_initial_release = 8".
Which seems correct since the versioning scheme was changed some day from
"x.0" to "x".
So the webpage code mentioned here might no longer work correctly now.
> But I don't know if that change was intentional, to avoid other
> problems, or just a small mistake, that I inherited when applied the
> changes for the Stretch release...
The "current_initial_release" entity is only used in that ../releases/index
file, to display the mentioned phrases.
So changing it from "9" to "9.0" should be safe.
Created with Sylpheed 3.5.0 under
D E B I A N L I N U X 8 . 0 " J E S S I E " .
Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/