On 20 April 2015 at 16:43, Brian Monroe <briancmonroe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have 2.18.2 I'm guessing that since you're in an
version" of Fedora, the packager decided to use the dev versions for
testing, bug reporting and such.
Fedora 22 repo is separate from the Fedora 21 repo, and I think it's
probably good to have dev versions in our dev releases.
Just my opinion and best guess.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:55 AM Martin Tarenskeen <m.tarenskeen(a)zonnet.nl>
> I am giving Fedora 22 (alpha release) a try - just curiosity.
> It seems it currently has lilypond-2.19.18 in updates-testing.
> I am not sure having "unstable development versions" in official
> repo is a good idea, is it?
It is a good idea. A few things to note:
1. Fedora 22 *alpha* is the next version of Fedora as Brian Monroe
points out. It's not an official release. It's not even the current
Fedora 22, fedora beta has been through maybe a month of test composes
and release candidates and is out today.
2. 'Unstable development' means undergoing current development, it
doesn't mean actively unstable. Lilypond appears to use a model which
ticks between 'unstable' versions (odd minor numbers) and 'stable'
versions, where nothing changes much and only bug fixes go in (even
minor numbers), like the old kernel development model. 2.19 has been
going for a while and the packagers may be aware the upstream is
closing on finalising it as a 2.20, you can see the history of changes
to the package at:
and current versions at
3. Fedora as a 'cutting edge' distro will often package the latest
version of software. This is how people get to try out new features.
If lilypond have tagged it with a release number they consider it
Contacts for the packagers can be seen at: