I see your point.
On Sunday, April 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen (Kolab Systems) wrote:
On 2012-04-14 21:08, Wan Zuhao wrote:
> Hi Jeroen,
> What you've suggested is definitely a good idea. I do agree it's
> to reflect which *version*, in addtion to the name, link, etc. of a
> particular gem that was converted into rpm, as sometimes the latest
> and bug fixes are not included in the rpm.
The point is also, sometimes bug fixes (especially security issues)
*are* in fact included in the RPM, but the gem/rpm package version
number would not reflect that.
Jeroen van Meeuwen
Systems Architect, Kolab Systems AG
e: vanmeeuwen at kolabsys.com
m: +44 74 2516 3817
pgp: 9342 BF08
ruby-sig mailing list