[aur-general] Should {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest be deleted
hi, As you might already know , webkit-gtk and its dependency libsoup are always under heavy development . I added {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest PKGBUILDS to the AUR because libwebkit releases started to depend on development releases from libsoup(2.27.x) . With gnome 2.28.x entering extra , the *-newest packages provide the same versions available in the official repos. Should I ask for the deletion of those packages ? Or keep them around in case webkit starts to depend on libsoup 2.29.x ?
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM, <Nezmer@allurelinux.org> wrote:
hi, As you might already know , webkit-gtk and its dependency libsoup are always under heavy development . I added {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest PKGBUILDS to the AUR because libwebkit releases started to depend on development releases from libsoup(2.27.x) .
With gnome 2.28.x entering extra , the *-newest packages provide the same versions available in the official repos.
Should I ask for the deletion of those packages ? Or keep them around in case webkit starts to depend on libsoup 2.29.x ?
As the odd releases indicate development versions how about calling it -unstable instead of -newest? That way you can just jump from .27 to .29. It probably doesn't take long before 2.29.1 is released. Ronald
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:56:00PM +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM, <Nezmer@allurelinux.org> wrote:
hi, As you might already know , webkit-gtk and its dependency libsoup are always under heavy development . I added {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest PKGBUILDS to the AUR because libwebkit releases started to depend on development releases from libsoup(2.27.x) .
With gnome 2.28.x entering extra , the *-newest packages provide the same versions available in the official repos.
Should I ask for the deletion of those packages ? Or keep them around in case webkit starts to depend on libsoup 2.29.x ?
As the odd releases indicate development versions how about calling it -unstable instead of -newest? That way you can just jump from .27 to .29. It probably doesn't take long before 2.29.1 is released.
Ronald I called them newest because there was no indication the webkit releases were considered unstable upstream.
Anyway , If you think renaming to *-unstable is the best practice , please delete the *-newest ones .
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:06 AM, <Nezmer@allurelinux.org> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:56:00PM +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM, <Nezmer@allurelinux.org> wrote:
hi, As you might already know , webkit-gtk and its dependency libsoup are always under heavy development . I added {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest PKGBUILDS to the AUR because libwebkit releases started to depend on development releases from libsoup(2.27.x) .
With gnome 2.28.x entering extra , the *-newest packages provide the same versions available in the official repos.
Should I ask for the deletion of those packages ? Or keep them around in case webkit starts to depend on libsoup 2.29.x ?
As the odd releases indicate development versions how about calling it -unstable instead of -newest? That way you can just jump from .27 to .29. It probably doesn't take long before 2.29.1 is released.
Ronald I called them newest because there was no indication the webkit releases were considered unstable upstream.
Anyway , If you think renaming to *-unstable is the best practice , please delete the *-newest ones .
mmm I guess I was mainly talking about the libsoup package. I deleted that one, the webkit-newest package can probably stay for the moment if you think it will depend on an unstable libsoup package in the near future. Ronald
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:10:42AM +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:06 AM, <Nezmer@allurelinux.org> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:56:00PM +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM, <Nezmer@allurelinux.org> wrote:
hi, As you might already know , webkit-gtk and its dependency libsoup are always under heavy development . I added {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest PKGBUILDS to the AUR because libwebkit releases started to depend on development releases from libsoup(2.27.x) .
With gnome 2.28.x entering extra , the *-newest packages provide the same versions available in the official repos.
Should I ask for the deletion of those packages ? Or keep them around in case webkit starts to depend on libsoup 2.29.x ?
As the odd releases indicate development versions how about calling it -unstable instead of -newest? That way you can just jump from .27 to .29. It probably doesn't take long before 2.29.1 is released.
Ronald I called them newest because there was no indication the webkit releases were considered unstable upstream.
Anyway , If you think renaming to *-unstable is the best practice , please delete the *-newest ones .
mmm I guess I was mainly talking about the libsoup package. I deleted that one, the webkit-newest package can probably stay for the moment if you think it will depend on an unstable libsoup package in the near future.
Ronald Makes sense . Thanks .
participants (2)
-
Nezmer＠allurelinux.org
-
Ronald van Haren