Diego Elio Pettenò <flamee...@flameeyes.eu> writes: > On 31/01/2013 20:58, Jack Kelly wrote: >> IMHO, that seems like a great way to cause trouble for unsuspecting >> users. (Anyone remember KDE4.0?) Can you expand on why you think it's a >> good plan? > > Because unlike KDE, automake can put a big fat warning in the generated > configure that says "You're using a version unsuitable for production", > and then people would understand it much better.
Or at automake invocation time? > KDE 4.0 was a screwup because there was no big fat warning, and users > insisted to have it. No user _asks_ for automake. > >> Is there a system like X.beta1, X.beta2, ..., X.0 that is going to fit >> the ordering system for most package managers? Bonus points if it works >> in asciibetical order, too. > > Good luck finding one. Gentoo would be fine with X.Y_betaZ — but I > honestly dislike X.Yb because that kind of stuff is usually _after_ X.Y > for almost everything but autotools.. Fair points. +1 to calling the betas "X.0". -- Jack
