Gentoo: dev-lang/erlang

Bruce Fitzsimons Bruce@REDACTED
Tue Jun 3 10:08:34 CEST 2003

Hi George,

----- Original Message -----
From: "George Shapovalov" <george@REDACTED>
To: "Bruce Fitzsimons" <bruce.fitzsimons@REDACTED>
Cc: <erlang-questions@REDACTED>
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: Gentoo: dev-lang/erlang

> Yup, incidentally I thought about this and was thinking about switching to
> similar scheme when R10 comes out :). I would probably have done so from
> beginning had I not observed R8B and then R9B and assumed that this is a
> complete version name, e.g no stuff is going to be added after the last
> letter. And yea, the original submission by Charlie Mac had -8b in the
> :).
Sounds fine, its really not a big problem, I just thought it was good to

> The real question however is what to do with the present stuff - the R9
> versions. Its inconvenient version numbers vs having to move stuff that is
> already in and is depended upon by some other packages. Basically it comes
> down to the following questions:
> 1. How many more versions are planned in the R9 branch before R10 gets
> If R9c will be followed by R10 it might be better to just keep this
> (9C will be 9d.ebuild) and switch to numeric versioning starting with R10
> (note, the ordering of versions will be preserved in portage, so that
> versions will be picked up properly - thus the necessity of this
I suspect R9C will be the last R9 version (based on history) but someone on
the list will have a better idea. Switching the scheme for R10 sounds fine
to me.

> 2. On a related note: how many gentoo usres are on this list?

Klacke uses gentoo (the yaws webserver - has an
ebuild). And theres me :-)


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list