From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.12] (helo=lo.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N79uI-000085-Eu for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:42:25 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N79t5-0000H9-IE for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:41:07 +0100 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:41:07 +0100 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:41:07 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:40:42 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1257682982.26962.14.camel@opal> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3pre) Gecko/20090811 Shredder/3.0b4pre In-Reply-To: Sender: news X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.12 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxtogo.org); Unknown failure Subject: Re: what to do with wrong checksum X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:42:25 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08-11-09 15:55, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks > wrote: >> Without making a comment on the commit message: >> >> As stated before the 3.33 version is clearly mentioned as "latest >> development version" on http://xmltwig.com/xmltwig/ >> The last stable version is 3.32 >> This project decided to provide snapshots (or whatever you want to >> call it) of the new version. In this case 3.33. Their choice. >> >> IMHO OE should have used the latest stable version. > > I fully agree and I didn't notice it was state on their website; In > this case the only wrong side here is OE (not upstream). Except if you want to read the docs, because the website states that you should read the docs of the development version. That fact coupled with no obvious signs on that page that the development version shouldn't get used, I wouldn't say OE is wrong to use the 3.33 version. Heck, the development version is the top item on that page. Either way, xmltwig is now on "the list". regards, Koen