* Erik Sandberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I have 2 suggestions here (which are more food for thought than opinions): > 1. How about adding two metapackages 'lilypond-stable' and > 'lilypond-unstable' (or whatever the names would be), depending on the latest > lilypondX.Y package? This would elimintate the drawback.
that's a *very* good idea. > 2. How about using Mats' naming convention for all odd-numbered versions of > lilypond? I'm not sure if I'm familiar with Mats' convention, could you refresh my memory? > It's not normal to want any other odd-numbered lilypond packages > than the very latest unstable one. You are right. The possibility of installing more than a version in the same series is true only with stable releases. Anyway, I'll also post these questions on the debian new developer mailing list in case they have specific policies or strong preferences in that regard. Pedro _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
