On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 5:59 AM, John McCabe-Dansted <gma...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Liviu Andronic <landronim...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > In my view "release" is extraneous here. We could have instead: > > lyx-1.6 (for latest stable 1.6.x release; probably forever 1.6.10) > > lyx (for latest stable release, currently 2.0.0 and soon 2.0.1, while > > in the future it will stand for 2.1.0; this would update the official > > Ubuntu LyX, which is just fine) > > lyx-2.1-alpha (for 2.1 alpha releases) > > lyx-2.1-beta (for 2.1 beta releases) > > lyx-2.1-rc (for 2.1 rc releases) > > LyX-<version> is more meaningful to me than branch vs trunk. > > Generally, if I upgrade 2.0.0svn as a user it is because there is some > must have feature in 2.0.0 so I want to adopt 2.0.0 early. Being > automatically upgraded to 2.1.0svn is annoying because I have files > appearing that are not compatible with 2.0.x, have to deal with the > usual regressions relating to trunk, and don't get any new features > that I actually care about. > > A tester may want to follow trunk-daily, esp. keytest. However, > testers following branch till 2.0.1 or so may be a good idea anyway; > there is no real need to automatically switch over to 2.1.0svn the day > 2.0.0 is released. Particularly adventurous users (including keytest) > often build from source anyway. > > > OK - I would suggest then the following naming of the binaries: lyx --- latest stable release of lyx (updates the ubuntu installation) The following installations should be compiled with version suffix to enable parallel installation: lyx-a.b --- for the latest stable release of a.b.x -- version suffix a.b These will stay in the ppa due to compatibility issues. lyx-a.b-svn --- for daily / regular builds of BANCH_a_b_X -- version suffix a.b-svn lyx-a.b-alpha --- for alpha releases of --- which version suffix? lyx-a.b-beta --- for beta releases --- which version suffix? lyx-a.b-rc --- for release candidates --- which version suffix? All these could go into one ppa (simply named lyx to avoid the stable / unstable question?) As mentioned before, the highly unstable (and not at users but at developers / early testers aimed) daily trunc build, should go into a separate ppa to avoid accidental installation from the lyx main ppa. Does that sound like a reasonable and useful setup? Rainer > To bikeshed a little, I'd be more likely to follow a weekly build than > a daily build. Daily would seem to burn download quota for no real > benefit, though I guess it does make it much more convenient for when > developers want to ask "does the latest build fix your problem?" > > > -- > John C. McCabe-Dansted > -- Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology Stellenbosch University South Africa Tel : +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44 Cell: +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98 Fax (F): +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44 Fax (D): +49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44 email: rai...@krugs.de Skype: RMkrug
