appdb issue: can't search for apps platinum on 1.0.x!

[Pauli Nieminen]

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Alexandre Julliard
<julliard at winehq.org> wrote:
> Ben Klein <shacklein at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Now as this is *your* project, AJ, what do you think? Should stable
>> branch be supported better by AppDB/bugzilla etc? At the moment, 1.0.1
>> is considered "too old" in some cases.
>
> There's no point in making stable releases if we decide that they are
> useless after 6 months (and no, the answer is not to make more frequent
> stable releases; even if we did one every 3 months we'd still have to
> support the old ones).
>

Time based stable releases that are coming about once in a year could
be good idea. Making stable release should be a lot easier with
passing and improving test suit. If that is considered too invasive
branching could happen when the candidate for stable branch goes to
RC.

Another way to make everyone happy with "unstable" would be mark every
12th wine release as stable and just branching it for bug fixing. Then
bug fix release could be 1.1.12.X.

2009/2/28 Remco <remco47 at gmail.com>:
>On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Ben Klein <shacklein at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2009/2/28 Remco <remco47 at gmail.com>:
>>> Oh, I see. You mean that the package manager prefers the local
>>> repository if all else is equal. That's solvable by bumping the
>>> version number of the package that you download from the site. So, in
>>> 'pseudo-versions', the repository would have these:
>>>
>>> wine 1.15-0
>>> wine 1.16-0
>>> wine 1.17-0
>>>
>>> While the site would provide these for download:
>>>
>>> wine 1.15-1
>>> wine 1.16-1
>>> wine 1.17-1
>>
>> This would fix the problem, but would also mean twice as much space is
>> required to store the packages. If we're willing to deal with that, go
>> for it!
>>
>
>Well, I don't know if any package manager really does prefer a locally
>installed version, to the point that it actually replaces the package
>with exactly the same one. It would seem like a rather pointless
>feature.

Why not just make separate package for installing the source file. It
could be named as wine-installer. Then post-install hook can download
and install the real wine package.

Pauli