[mythtv-users] Ubuntu 10.04 PPA for 0.23?
dansto.well+myth at gmail.com
Mon May 31 13:40:41 UTC 2010
2010/5/21 Marc Randolph <mrand at pobox.com>:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:22 AM, ryan patterson <ryan.goat at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Dan <dansto.well+myth at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I don't understand this, why do the *buntu repos seem to use version
>>> numbers that do not reflect the actual version number (as they usually
>>> do for all other packages)? The version is given as
>>> "0.23.0+fixes24158-0ubuntu2" but in debian-land anything that is a
>>> preview release should have a name starting with something like
>>> "0.23.0~rc1". Otherwise you can't really tell what is *really* 0.23.0
>>> and the sort order goes weird. Seems like they kinda rely on the
>>> revision number (24158) rather than the release number to signify
>>> what's really going on? Or am I misunderstanding?
>> You ask some very good questions. In my opinion the mythbuntu
>> maintainers make very questionable choices (not just with the version
>> numbers). So I make it a point to keep their packages far away from
>> my computers. I'm sure they have the best intentions though.
> Howdy guys,
Thanks for the response. I'll try not to get too far into this since
it's an issue for the mythbuntu dev discussion, but I'll mention my
feeling on some of the things you raise:
> I believe that the strong preference would be to do exactly Dan
> describes above. And had there been a stable MythTV release handy,
> I'm sure that is what would have happened. And in fact, that was the
> original plan - you'll recall that MythTV 0.23 was to be released in
> early April, and they were actually on schedule through March, so the
> decision was made to release Lucid/10.04 with 0.23. Then a non-code
> related issue came up that pushed the release out beyond mid-April,
> when Lucid repo freeze occurs.
> So, why not just put rc1 into the repo? Well, there were a number of
> important fixes that were committed after rc1. Do you release to
> Lucid with those known issues, or do you take a newer snapshot that
> has some of them resolved? The decision was to go for a newer, more
> stable snapshot. Maybe the string should have been +fixes24158+rc1 to
> indicate it was post rc1.
Actually something like this:
(The tilde is important for sorting purposes)
> But to be honest, does that really matter?
> Maybe I"m wrong, but I'm not sure the majority of users *really* care
> what the version string shows or means (be it rc or otherwise).
Yes it does really matter. It's not about the number of users that
care, it's about the version numbering being meaningful, so that
people can refer to versions correctly in
discussion/troubleshooting/etc and so that package upgrades can go
smoothly. This is particularly important when people might be getting
myth from different repositories.
To be honest I'm a little bit worried that you put it in terms like
the number of users who "care", I'm sure you understand that version
numbering is important for these purposes...?
> Of course, you could make the argument that Lucid should have just
> been released with 0.22 since 0.23 wasn't gold yet. But between the
> lack of analog tuning combined with other major bug fixes that were
> not backported to 0.22, I personally think going 0.23 was the right
> choice, even if it wasn't gold. Some of the myth devs also agreed
> that going with pre-released 0.23 over 0.22 was the right decision.
This is always a tricky decision. 0.23 has some nice stuff in it (I'm
thinking mainly of the cpu-hog fix!) so I'm personally happy that
we're getting the shiny new version.
Thanks for your work on mythbuntu!
> Ryan, I think it is off-topic for this mailing list, but I'd love to
> get an email from you off-list on what other choices you feel are
> questionable - the Ubuntu (and Mythbuntu) teams are always trying to
> Have fun!
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
More information about the mythtv-users