On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 12:09:27PM +0200, Stephan Bosch wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > >As a (downstream) packager I have some questions: > > > >a) pigeonhole is called a working title - will the final release > > be called something else like dovecot-sieve again? > > Well, I was a bit uncertain about the name. People who don't know > what a pigeonhole is or what the verb means (especially the Dutch), > sometimes have `interesting' associations with that name. I am quite > confident though that this name is the definitive one. I'll adjust > the website accordingly.
:) > >b) The versioning seems to go from 0.1.15 to 0.1.13. From a packager's > > POV it would be better to allow a natural version upgrade > > path. Perhaps the version in hg is just not updated? > > > >The reason for these questions/clarifications are that Angel and I are > >packaging dovecot 2.x betas and matching sieve plugins for allowing > >more people to a broader testing before the projects go gold. We'd > >like to have proper naming and versioning in place already for the > >beta packages. > > > > The Pigeonhole project is not released for v2.0 yet, so there is no > version for v2.0. Current plans are to call name the packages > dovecot-2.0-pigeonhole-0.2.0. However, this versioning scheme is not > ideal, so ideas are welcome. How about using a version scheme starting with "2.0"? If there is a pigeonhole for each 2.0.x release, then dovecot-2.0.x.tar.bz2 dovecot-pigeonhole-2.0.x.tar.bz2 could be the released pairs. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgpm5GS9pMlOg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
