From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Boyer Subject: Re: Official releases? Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 12:19:21 -0600 Message-ID: <1162318761.3785.3.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <1162307025.11613.1.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20061031170824.GC23354@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 67-41-71-127.roch.qwest.net ([67.41.71.127]:5800 "EHLO jdub.homelinux.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423762AbWJaSUJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:20:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20061031170824.GC23354@redhat.com> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Jones Cc: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 12:08 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 09:03:45AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Howdy, > > > > I'm just curious if anyone is ever really going to do an "official" > > release of sparse. We've got daily snapshots provided by Dave Jones, > > and git of course, but will an official release tarball with shiny > > version numbers and everything be created? > > > > The only reason I ask is because it makes packaging sparse a bit easier > > to some degree. > > Well, all you need from a version number is a monotonically increasing > number right? You could munge the daily snapshot dates into same. Yes, but you don't keep them all laying around forever. You keep about a week's worth right? So if one were to package say sparse-2006-10-25.tar.gz, it'll disappear in a week. Makes it hard to verify those against the upstream tarball when the tarball no longer exists :). > It's not as 'pretty' as a real version number, but it works with > minimal effort on behalf of Linus. Yeah, I know. It's not a big deal. I was just curious if something like an official release was ever even planned or not. josh