[aur-general] Compiz package naming

[Rob McCathie]

Hi Charles :)

> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 10:51:15 +0100
> From: Charles Bos <charlesbos1 at gmail.com>
> To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)"
>         <aur-general at archlinux.org>
> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Compiz package naming
> Message-ID:
>         <CAJr1w13nX3riq=+BoozWuviDA-1gRHcZa-D0RPHvZTdvXg=rsQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> This change sounds sensible to me. I would be more than happy to turn
> compiz-core-bzr back into compiz-bzr.
>
> Regarding compiz.org, that has been dead for a long time and I wouldn't
> consider it an authority on Compiz information. For instance: on the front
> page of wiki.compiz.org it states that 0.8.8 is the latest 0.8 release and
> 0.9.8 is the latest 0.9 release when it is actually 0.8.9 and 0.9.11
> respectively.
>
> I wouldn't regard the 0.9.x series is not a fork. It's a development branch
> which should theoretically be released as Compiz 0.10 or Compiz 1.0 in the
> same way that GNOME 3.13 is a development branch that will be released as
> 3.14 in the future.

I think it's a struggle to even refer to it as a development branch
these days. It's been used in multiple releases of the (supposedly)
enterprise-grade Ubuntu LTS releases.

Doesn't sound like the sort of distribution release that "development
branch" software would be used in.

Personally, I view the 0.9 series as the current release branch.


> Regarding the renaming of the 0.8 packages. Perhaps they could be called
> compiz0.8 instead of compiz-legacy. This sometimes happens in the official
> repos. For instance: there's wxgtk (which is at version 3) and wxgtk2.8.
> Just a thought.

Sure, compiz-legacy, compiz0.8, either works.

--
Regards,
Rob McCathie