[aur-general] Should {libwebkit,libsoup}-newest be deleted

[Nezmer at allurelinux.org]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:10:42AM +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:06 AM, <Nezmer at 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 at 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 .