Nick Rusnov, the current Debian maintainer of nmh asked me to forward
the following message to this list:
------- Forwarded Message
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:25:38 -0700
From: Nick Rusnov <email@example.com>
To: Harald Geyer <Harald.Geyer@gmx.at>
Subject: nmh list stuffa
On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 12:56:32PM -0400, Ken Hornstein wrote:
My $0.02 regarding the whole 1.1 release naming:
I would have preferred that 1.1 not really be out there. I never
announced it and I couldn't remove it, but somehow it ended up as the
release for a bunch of systems. I never considered this a "real"
But as Jon has discovered, there are plenty of people out there who
will speak up when they think you're doing the wrong thing, but damn
few who will actually help. My advice to Jon is: do what you want, and
the rest of the world will have to suck it up if they don't like it.
You're doing the work: that gives you the right to make the decision.
I think he should give consideration to other people's opinions, but
the decision is ultimately his.
I guess I should pipe up with why debian has a 1.1-release nmh package.
The debian package is based on the appearently ill-fated 1.1-release
that was uploaded to somewhere or other (savannah I assume). My memory
is a bit fuzzy but I could've sworn there was some sort of announcement,
although the closest I could find was this message from Ken
Not an announcement by any means.
Even though the the package is version 1.1-release it wouldn't be much
of an imposition to have another 1.1 "real" release, as I could version
it a variety of ways (1.1-release-official and 1.1-release2 evaluate as
'greater' versions than 1.1-release, and of course 1.2 is greater than
1.1-release also). Maybe to reduce users' confusion 1.2 would be better,
but it can't be claimed that its needed for package management version
- -><- Nick Rusnov
- -><- http://nick.industrialmeats.com
- -><- firstname.lastname@example.orgemail@example.com
------- End of Forwarded Message
Nmh-workers mailing list