wintermute-devel team mailing list archive

[Adrian Borucki <gentoolx@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 31 August 2011 21:24, danteashton@xxxxxxxxx <danteashton@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> How exactly do you mean, Adrian? That the packages be .deb (as opposed to
> .rpm)?

I mean that when new version of software arises we release new package and
it is immediately installed as an upgrade.


>
>
I do think we should retain versioning;
>
> Lets say we have 1.0.0 released
> 1.0.1 would lead up to the next minor 'landmark' (when released, all ISO's
> etc would default to that)
> and 1.1.0 is more of a landmark, rather then a release.
>
Yes, this is good and we can just make daily-builds for that.


>
>
> On 31 August 2011 20:15, Adrian Borucki <gentoolx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 31 August 2011 18:29, SII <dante.ashton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all.
>>>
>>> I've been thinking; if everything goes to plan, WIntermute should be able
>>> to automatically upgrade itself to the latest version.
>>> So, with that in mind, when the system is finally ready to be released;
>>> why don't we go with a rolling release model, instead of a versioned one?
>>>
>> Yes, that would be more flexible for such system. We only have to make
>> sure that constant flow of changes won't turn into a mess. Of course, some
>> information about version is always useful for management purposes. I am
>> only wondering how to manage such scheme where different parts of system can
>> be upgraded independently. By the way, will Wintermute use DEB packages for
>> software managing internals or should we design something different
>> (possibly still based on packages)?
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -Danté Ashton
>
> Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici
>
>
> Sent from Ubuntu
>
>