Am 24.06.2015 um 17:43 schrieb Bartłomiej Piotrowski:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 15:00:14 +0300 Νῖκος Θεοδώρου <ntheo1979@gmail.com> wrote:
Then they only kept git ("master" and "stable"). The [extra] package [1] pulls from git, but it's called "libx264". Initially I called the lib32 version lib32-libx264 as well, but then gS644 in the comments suggested the stable-git suffix and I went on with it (the TUs didn't raise an objection at the merge request). Now JonnyJD raises the naming issue again. The whole discussion can be found at the package's comments [2].
To be honest, I'm not sure how the package should be named, so I am asking here for a final judgement on the matter.
[1] http://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pa... [2] http://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-libx264-stable-git/
The [extra] package is always set to some particular commit from stable branch.
Well, yes. The AUR package autoupdates itself automatically with every build. The [extra] package is manually updated for the latest commit. So they mostly do have the same version except for the short time when one package is updated and one is not. So I could just create a lib32-libx264 and update the commit when [extra] updates (late update) and lib32-libx264-stable-git is updated automatically, but possibly earlier than libx264 in [extra] (early update). I can create lib32-libx264 as a clone of lib32-libx264-stable-git and switch to a specific commit. Unless Nikos/Gordon wants to do that. -- JonnyJD