kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Marco Ciampa <ciampix@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 06:37:46PM -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote:
> On 1/19/22 05:18 PM, Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 9:13 PM Steven A. Falco <stevenfalco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > It would still be helpful if the doc repo could be tagged at the same point that everything else is tagged, because every single Fedora package needs a correct version in its name.  For example, it would be very strange (perhaps "illegal") to package something called the 6.0.1 doc that came from some random SHA in an untagged tree.
> > 
> > I don't understand why this discussion is so difficult to understand.
> > I agree with Jon and don't see any problem for distros. As far as I
> > can see the point is that the documentation package version shouldn't
> > be logically dependent on the KiCad packages or vice versa. You can
> > have package kicad-v6.0-documentation version, say, 20222001 [date],
> > can't you? You don't have to give it the version number 6.0.x. If a
> > git tag is needed for technical reasons, let's have automatic tagging
> > which adds a tag each day.
> 
> > I don't think the discussion is difficult to understand.  

> But Fedora's process doesn't map into what you have just proposed.

Not just Fedora's but nearly any other distro do not work in that way...

-- 

Saluton,
Marco Ciampa