Subject: Re: Posting the rpm
From: Logan Hall (warrior514@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Tue Nov 30 1999 - 20:01:09 CST
That is what i was thinking when i made it, mostly because the current CVS is
quite abit further along than 0.7.6 is. I will wait a bit before posting it to
the incoming dir. so i can see more peoples opinions.
Paul Rohr wrote:
> At 07:40 PM 11/30/99 -0600, sterwill@abisource.com wrote:
> >Logan Hall wrote:
> >> I would like to post the rpm to ftp.linuxppc.org/incoming, but im not
> >> sure what the rules you guys have for that are. Is it alright with you
> >> guys? Also i have the version number set at 19991129. Should i build
> >> again with another version number?
> >
> >As far as I know, no one here objects to new packages for the architectures
> >we can't support ourselves.
>
> Nope. Not at all. We'd love to support everyone, but until we can, we're
> more than happy to have people get versions of our software any way they
> can.
>
> >There have been RPMs of AbiWord (older versions,
> >like 0.7.5) on ftp.linuxppc.org before. As for the version numbers,
> >it would probably be least confusing to keep the same version ("0.7.6")
> >and add a new build number (our RPMs are usually "1").
>
> Just to be clear. This RPM should only be labelled 0.7.6 if it was made off
> a clean copy of the 0.7.6 sources. If it was made from a current CVS view
> of the tree, then using the date as a version number would be a much better
> idea.
>
> Paul
------ Logan Hall
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Nov 30 1999 - 20:00:53 CST