Re: xerces-c, xerces-c-devel, xerces-c-doc 2.1.0-2 available forreview/upload

[Robert Collins <rbcollins at cygwin dot com>]

On Wed, 2002-11-06 at 00:37, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> 
> On 6 Nov 2002, Robert Collins wrote:
> 
> > > > Anyone wishing to review these packages can point setup.exe to http://abackus.imagineis.com.
> > >
> > > You've changed the version number to 2.1.0-2, but this is not correct.
> >
> > Actually, it's long practice here, that each update gets a new -x
> > number, irrespective of whether they are released to the repository or
> > not. I think it avoids *any* confusion in the reviewers to do this. Not
> > doing it may lead to inaccurate feedback.
> 
> I use only links - copy&paste is suffiecient for me. And if you're
> uploading files on sourceware you have one thing less to do i.e. rename
> the files.However I see that I tried to enforce my own preferences and
> for that I apologize.

No need to apologise, things can always be changed and negotiated. I
don't understand what you mean by 'one less thing to do' though - there
is no need (and in fact reasons not to) rename files when uploading to
sourceware. 

Consider this: if the test copy we review was -3, and you approve that
version, you should not rename it to -1, else when -2 comes out, all the
testers will fail to upgrade. So -3 in review, stays as -3 when
uploading. Likewise, updating -1 to -2 to -3 during the review process
allows the testers to update properly. Does that make sense?

Rob

-- 
---
GPG key available at: http://users.bigpond.net.au/robertc/keys.txt.
---

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part