On Fri, 2015-05-08 at 18:08 +0000, Brian Monroe wrote:
Looking at the wiki guide the way suggested is to :
The most current version: ardour
Previous version names: ardour2 (or ardour3.5)
This would differ from having ardour be a meta package.
having the latest version packaged as "ardour" would making introducing
the next major version into stable Fedora releases a hassle. Say ardour
were version 4, then introducing version 5 would require creating
ardour4, obsoleting ardour <= ... so existing users aren't upgraded to
the new version (which may be incompatible). All existing users would
have to get an update just to follow the name change.
Thinking further about it, having a meta package that only pulls in the
latest ardour major version when it arrives is kind of overkill. The
most simple way is probably just having ardourN packages for each major
version. If, like with the version 3 and 4, the session file formats are
compatible between versions, we can retire the older version in upcoming
Fedora releases, i.e. in the current case, retire ardour3 from Fedora 22
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:55 AM Martin Tarenskeen
On Fri, 8 May 2015, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>> - Move version 2 to its own ardour2 package. This would get
>> re-reviewed but I guess that's a mere formality.
>> - Reuse the ardour package as a meta-package which simply
>> latest versioned package.
>> - Retire ardour3.
>> What do you think?
> I think retiring ardour3 at this point is too early - I for
> still adjusting to the ardour4 interface.
There should be some consistency in the naming and versioning
A crazy example is rosegarden: Now version 14.02 and the name
music mailing list
music mailing list
Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase
Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
nils(a)redhat.com nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011