On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Liviu Andronic <landronim...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Rainer M Krug <r.m.k...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 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?) > > > Why not the following PPAs: LyX Releases and LyX Daily? > I think that would be the best solution. If there is consent about this point, I would be happy to implement this. > > > 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? > > > This all makes sense to me. I would only insist in grouping > lyx-a.b-svn with lyx-a.b-trunk. As much as latest branch would usually > be more stable than the latest stable release, the branch could easily > contain nasty regressions: it is still by definition unreleased code. > We wouldn't want to encourage people using lyx-a.b-svn over lyx. And > this way we can have a PPA for daily builds and one for releases. But > that's possibly just my preference. > I agree with you, but it was stated earlier in this discussion, that BRANCH_2_0_X is as stable (possibly even more stable) than the actual last release - so it should not be together with daily-trunc. But I think you are absolutely right: to put it into the same ppa with the releases, would indicate an "always stable" daily build, which it is not. One option would be to trigger, whenever the BRANCH is considered as stable, a manual build is triggered (which goes into lyx-release), while the daily buids still go into lyx-daily. Now the question would be who declares BRANCH as stable for this stable-branch build? Cheers, Rainer > Regards > Liviu > -- 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
