Ludovic Courtès (2016-02-12 16:49 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: > >> The fact that we have 2 versions is the answer. In Emacs UI a package >> is not considered to be obsolete if there is a package definition with >> the same name+version. >> >> That's why "texinfo 6.0" is green in the list, not red (as obsolete >> packages). > > Oh, to me, ^ meant “upgrade”, like ‘guix package -u’ but only taking > into account the version number (‘guix package -u’ upgrades if the store > file name differs, even if the version number is the same.)
OK, you can still mark it for upgrading using "U" key. If you don't mind I wouldn't like to change the current behavior (at least now) :-) >> I believe marking such packages as obsolete is not correct and it may be >> confusing. See <https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guix/2016-02-09#T909651>. > > I think we need a different solution for packages that have several > series. For instance, we could have: > > (define gnupg-2.0 > (package … > (properties `((series . "2.0"))))) > > and that would lead the various UIs to upgrade only to a package whose > version prefix is “2.0”. > > WDYT? Yeah, this looks like a great solution for such issues! -- Alex
