On Monday, July 1, 2024 6:46:06 PM EDT Alec Leamas wrote: > On 02/07/2024 00:31, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > HI again > > > On July 1, 2024 10:18:07 PM UTC, Alec Leamas <leamas.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> But here the situation is that upstream do care and wants to fix it. But > >> they need our help (an epoch) to accomplish this to handle the legacy. > >> > >> We could be helpful, or not. Why not give a hand? > > > > No. That's us fixing it. They can bump the version to whatever they want > > to address the issue. Epochs are forever, so should be a last resort. > Yes, epochs are forever and should not be taken lightly, agreed. > > Expanding on the situation. The current opencpn version is 5.9.x, soon > to be 5.10 in a tick-tock cycle. > > However, the opencpn packages have versions like 8763.x, automatically > generated from a build number. This is not communicated to users, they > just install and update. > > Obviously, upstream should start building packages with versions like > 5.9.x..., 5.10.x... etc. But any such version is lower than the current > build number. > > If you switch hats for a moment: have you any advice for upstream in > this situation? > > --alec 8763.5.10
Next build is: 8763.5.10~8764 Scott K
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
