On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:40:27AM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Boris Pek <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> At this point, I see 4 options: > >>> > >>> 1) status quo - leave supertux 0.1.x in sid, and supertux 0.3.x in > >>> experimental > >>> 2) only ship development version - upload supertux 0.3.x to unstable > >>> 3) offer both versions, defaulting to development version when user > >>> runs apt-get install supertux (current option used in Ubuntu) - > >>> src:supertux-stable offering 0.1.x, src:supertux offering 0.3.x > >>> 4) offer both versions, defaulting to stable version when user runs > >>> apt-get install supertux - src:supertux offering 0.1.x, > >>> src:supertux-experimental or src:supertux2 offering 0.3.x > >> > >> Personally, I'd argue for 2, or failing that 3. > > > > +1 > > > > Ok, so we do have some sort of consensus going now... > > I was in favour of 3, but I suppose there's no real reason to be > shipping both 0.1.x and 0.3.x side-by-side other than the fact that > upstream labels 0.1.x as the stable branch, so 2 is fine by me as > well. My experience with supertux 0.3.x has so far been pretty stable, > but anectodal evidence probably isn't worth that much anyways. > > However, as long as Christoph objects to it (e.g. [1]), I won't be > deviating from the status quo.
The nice thing about option 2 is that you can trivially switch to option 3 by uploading a supertux-1.x package. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
