Drupal Modules and Linux Distros
Hi Everyone, So, there's been talk for a while in Gentooland of packaging up drupal modules to offer to gentoo users. As people are probably aware, the Gentoo way is to fetch source tarballs directly from upstream sources and build on the users' boxes. Drupal modules have historically been problematic for us to package, however. The thing is we do digest checking on the tarballs to assure some level of integrity. So, once a tarball is released, we count on that tarball not changing (a change signifies something potentially sinister happened). So, I'd like to make a request to the development community here (especially authors of contributed modules): would it be possible to change tarball versions when the contents change? That would help us in Gentoo to finally bring drupal modules to the Gentoo masses. Please note that drupal itself suffers no such ailment, and we're very happy with it. I'm not sure how other distributions' packagers feel about this issue, but I'd like to help achieve a resolution here. Thanks! -- Seemant Kulleen Developer, Gentoo Linux
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
So, there's been talk for a while in Gentooland of packaging up drupal modules to offer to gentoo users. As people are probably aware, the Gentoo way is to fetch source tarballs directly from upstream sources and build on the users' boxes. Drupal modules have historically been problematic for us to package, however.
Our relationship with people packaging Drupal has also been rather problematic. ;p Also, before you consider doing any package you should check if your distribution's release policy matches Drupal's. As a result of such a check not being done, Debian ships now with a Drupal 4.5 package which isn't maintained by us anymore.
The thing is we do digest checking on the tarballs to assure some level of integrity. So, once a tarball is released, we count on that tarball not changing (a change signifies something potentially sinister happened). So, I'd like to make a request to the development community here (especially authors of contributed modules): would it be possible to change tarball versions when the contents change? That would help us in Gentoo to finally bring drupal modules to the Gentoo masses.
This is not a thing developers themselves can do anything about. The problem is with our way of packaging things. Luckily, this should change soon and from there on tarballs once created should be stable. Cheers, Gerhard
On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 12:29 +0200, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
Our relationship with people packaging Drupal has also been rather problematic. ;p
I hope not with Gentoo...
Also, before you consider doing any package you should check if your distribution's release policy matches Drupal's. As a result of such a check not being done, Debian ships now with a Drupal 4.5 package which isn't maintained by us anymore.
Not sure what you mean here -- Gentoo tends to be a moving target, so if 4.6 gets deemed as the new upstream stable, Gentoo devs tend to follow up on that in the distro itself (in most cases, anyway).
This is not a thing developers themselves can do anything about. The problem is with our way of packaging things. Luckily, this should change soon and from there on tarballs once created should be stable.
Being completely new to the world of drupal, I'm not sure I understand the packaging method or the changes in store. Can you point me to a doc where I may learn more? Also, when will these changes happen? Thanks, -- Seemant Kulleen Developer, Gentoo Linux
On Oct 25, 2006, at 3:56 AM, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
Can you point me to a doc where I may learn more?
Also, when will these changes happen?
http://drupal.org/node/90436 short answer: any day now. -derek (dww)
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 12:29 +0200, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
Our relationship with people packaging Drupal has also been rather problematic. ;p
I hope not with Gentoo...
Also, before you consider doing any package you should check if your distribution's release policy matches Drupal's. As a result of such a check not being done, Debian ships now with a Drupal 4.5 package which isn't maintained by us anymore.
Not sure what you mean here -- Gentoo tends to be a moving target, so if 4.6 gets deemed as the new upstream stable, Gentoo devs tend to follow up on that in the distro itself (in most cases, anyway).
Debian has apparently a policy to never add new features to a stable Debian release, only bug fixes. But since Debian's release cycle is much longer than Drupal's this leads to problems. Drupal's stable release is 4.7 and 4.5 was released about two years ago. So if Gentoo accepts new features into its new releases, then this won't be a problem.
This is not a thing developers themselves can do anything about. The problem is with our way of packaging things. Luckily, this should change soon and from there on tarballs once created should be stable.
Being completely new to the world of drupal, I'm not sure I understand the packaging method or the changes in store. Can you point me to a doc where I may learn more?
http://drupal.org/node/77562 http://drupal.org/node/90436
Also, when will these changes happen?
Soon(tm) Actually, some have already happened. The rest might happen this or next week. Oh, and a final word from me: Please don't simply package modules *because* *you* *can*. Contrib is not reviewed in any way. Modules may have serious security holes. Modules may even be abandoned. So first evaluate the modules you want to package. Cheers, Gerhard, wearing his contrib-CVS admin hat
To be honest, I can't really see the point in providing Drupal with a Linux distribution. Most users won't need it and those who do are usually skilled enough to do that themselves (at least they are using Gentoo and not Windows). Packaging contrib modules doesn't make that much sense to me as well because it's just unzipping a tarball into the modules directory (or wherever you install the module to). The actual installation has to happen inside of Drupal anyway. Konstantin Käfer – http://kkaefer.com/
-----Original Message----- From: development-bounces@drupal.org
To be honest, I can't really see the point in providing Drupal with a Linux distribution.
The reason why I dont compile my own programs anymore and use a package management tool has nothing to do with my lack of skills to do a ./configure. The reason people prefer packages is because they can use repositories and most of all; they have a single point to update their software to a stable version that is secure. When you [design|maintain|sell] lots of hosts, you dont want operations to compile a new version for every leak sendmail has (let alone run sendmail :-), you want to trust the distro to do regression testing, patch and update within a release. Now Drupal isnt the same as a compiled program and a Drupal install does have dependecies within the installed modules which might not all be in the repository (homegrown, patched etc), but having *one* single point where you can trust that the latest and greatest vanilla version is available is something we need IMHO.
Op woensdag 25 oktober 2006 13:47, schreef Konstantin Käfer:
To be honest, I can't really see the point in providing Drupal with a Linux distribution. Most users won't need it and those who do are usually skilled enough to do that themselves (at least they are using Gentoo and not Windows). Packaging contrib modules doesn't make that much sense to me as well because it's just unzipping a tarball into the modules directory (or wherever you install the module to). The actual installation has to happen inside of Drupal anyway.
I am involved in serveral hosting plans, and must disagree. Security comes first! with most hosters. What you state is one side of the story. Many developers of a syste (Joomla, Drupal etc) tend to think that the whole world evolves around their product and forget that many people offer Drupal as part of a range of options. You cannot seriously consider that they get into all the different falvours of security mailing lists, all the off-beat security release systems, and all the weird wais of communication (RSS, mailinglists etceteras). Having an option where you rely on one distributor, that centralises this for you, takes the hassle out of your hands and that maintains the software fore you, is for a lto of people a good option. I am saying this, because the flamewar against packageers should stop here and now. We, Drupal, should help packagers. If we don't offer an infrastructure that allows packagers to ditribute our system in a properway, *then* we have a problem. And before people start thinking 'talk is silver yadiyadiya', I /am/ still maintaining sympal scripts[1], but am investigating a conversion to capistrano, because that will take some overhead from my shoulders; So lets try to come up with an infrastructure that allows distributors to do the distributing for us (then we can go back to developing Drupal) and lets encourage distributors, instead of telling them that "we have bad experiences" or that "we cannot see the point of having Drupal in a distro". Beleive me when I say that the decision to include Ruby on Rails in the next OSX server release will be another boom for that platform. Distribution matters, especially if its done poperly. We are the ones who can make it happen properly. In the mean time, Seemant Kulleen can have a look at the apt-get-alike module installer[2] by jmrenouard Bèr [1]http://webschuur.com/node/637 [2]http://cvs.drupal.org/viewcvs/drupal/contributions/modules/sympal_scripts/mo... -- [ End-user Drupal services and hosting | Sympal.nl ] Commentaren en feedback op inhoud: http://help.sympal.nl/commentaren_en_feedback_op_inhoud
Am 25.10.2006 um 14:14 schrieb Bèr Kessels:
I am involved in serveral hosting plans, and must disagree. Security comes first! with most hosters. What you state is one side of the story. Many developers of a syste (Joomla, Drupal etc) tend to think that the whole world evolves around their product and forget that many people offer Drupal as part of a range of options. You cannot seriously consider that they get into all the different falvours of security mailing lists, all the off-beat security release systems, and all the weird wais of communication (RSS, mailinglists etceteras). That's indeed a good reason.
I am saying this, because the flamewar against packageers should stop here and now. We, Drupal, should help packagers. I really didn't mean to start a flamewar against packageers (I am using a packaging system (Fink) for software as well) and I value their work.
Konstantin Käfer – http://kkaefer.com/
Op woensdag 25 oktober 2006 14:57, schreef Konstantin Käfer:
I am saying this, because the flamewar against packageers should stop here and now. We, Drupal, should help packagers.
I really didn't mean to start a flamewar against packageers (I am using a packaging system (Fink) for software as well) and I value their work.
No, I know, I wasn't referring to this particular thread but to the one against fantastico on Drupal.org, digg et al. http://drupal.org/forum/fantastico-de-luxe I am of the opinion that we, Drupal are just as much to blame for that fantastico disaster as fantastico. By offering a good, standardised deployment strategy and framework this would not have happened. There is no standard yet, but I have a feeling that capistrano might grow big enough to become such a deployment standard. At least, I am not aware of any OSS standard that can be used for standard software (CMS) deployment. If you nkow any, please let me know :) For those interested in a good deployment system, please chime in at http://groups.drupal.org/node/1461 and see if you can be of help by making a capistrano recipe. Bèr -- [ End-user Drupal services and hosting | Sympal.nl ] Commentaren en feedback op inhoud: http://help.sympal.nl/commentaren_en_feedback_op_inhoud
On 25 Oct 2006, at 13:47, Konstantin Käfer wrote:
To be honest, I can't really see the point in providing Drupal with a Linux distribution. Most users won't need it and those who do are usually skilled enough to do that themselves (at least they are using Gentoo and not Windows). Packaging contrib modules doesn't make that much sense to me as well because it's just unzipping a tarball into the modules directory (or wherever you install the module to). The actual installation has to happen inside of Drupal anyway.
We have a lot of people that install Drupal using Debian's apt-get. Having to download and un-tar 10 tarballs is a pain. Also, Gentoo automatically recompiles Apache, PHP and/or MySQL if certain features are missing, and might as well configure Apache. In short, there are many good reasons to support packagers like Gentoo, and I'd like to see us actively support them (eg. don't re-create tarballs, upgrades from the command line, etc.). It is sad to see this discussion side-tracked. The purpose of this discussion is NOT to debate why packagers exist (that is not what Seemant asked for), but to figure out how we can better cooperate. The world doesn't care about your opinion about packagers; whatever it is you think about them, they are not going to go away. So if you're not going to help make Drupal better for packagers, don't add noise to the discussion either. It would be a waste of time and bits. Thanks. Seemant: as mentioned, the repackage issue will be fixed in the near feature. Anything else that we could do to make things easier on your side? If so, I'd love to learn more about it, so we can work on it. (Thanks for Gentoo. I'm a long time Gentoo user.) -- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/
On 10/25/06 12:24 PM, Dries Buytaert wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006, at 13:47, Konstantin Käfer wrote:
To be honest, I can't really see the point in providing Drupal with a Linux distribution. Most users won't need it and those who do are usually skilled enough to do that themselves (at least they are using Gentoo and not Windows). Packaging contrib modules doesn't make that much sense to me as well because it's just unzipping a tarball into the modules directory (or wherever you install the module to). The actual installation has to happen inside of Drupal anyway.
We have a lot of people that install Drupal using Debian's apt-get. Having to download and un-tar 10 tarballs is a pain. Also, Gentoo automatically recompiles Apache, PHP and/or MySQL if certain features are missing, and might as well configure Apache. In short, there are many good reasons to support packagers like Gentoo, and I'd like to see us actively support them (eg. don't re-create tarballs, upgrades from the command line, etc.).
It is sad to see this discussion side-tracked. The purpose of this discussion is NOT to debate why packagers exist (that is not what Seemant asked for), but to figure out how we can better cooperate. The world doesn't care about your opinion about packagers; whatever it is you think about them, they are not going to go away. So if you're not going to help make Drupal better for packagers, don't add noise to the discussion either. It would be a waste of time and bits. Thanks.
Seemant: as mentioned, the repackage issue will be fixed in the near feature. Anything else that we could do to make things easier on your side? If so, I'd love to learn more about it, so we can work on it.
FWIW, I'd love to see drupal become more package system friendly as well. Just because debian proper has a release cycle that doesn't work well with Drupal's doesn't mean that a drupal apt-repository isn't possible. And, as discussed here, gentoo could benefit a lot from drupal packages. There are a *lot* of benefits to having your drupal install maintained in the same manner as the rest of your system. So, +1 - and a big thanks to dww (et al) for all the hard work he's done moving us in this direction. -- James Walker :: http://walkah.net/ :: xmpp:walkah@walkah.net
I have a number of comments on this thread, which I have bastardized into one email here... On Oct 25, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Dries Buytaert wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006, at 13:47, Konstantin Käfer wrote:
To be honest, I can't really see the point in providing Drupal with a Linux distribution. Most users won't need it and those who do are usually skilled enough to do that themselves (at least they are using Gentoo and not Windows). Packaging contrib modules doesn't make that much sense to me as well because it's just unzipping a tarball into the modules directory (or wherever you install the module to). The actual installation has to happen inside of Drupal anyway.
We have a lot of people that install Drupal using Debian's apt- get. Having to download and un-tar 10 tarballs is a pain. Also, Gentoo automatically recompiles Apache, PHP and/or MySQL if certain features are missing, and might as well configure Apache. In short, there are many good reasons to support packagers like Gentoo, and I'd like to see us actively support them (eg. don't re- create tarballs, upgrades from the command line, etc.).
Indeed. Major companies are starting to build releases on Drupal software (IBM, Spikesource), and companies like mine are working to help with Drupal as a hosted application. The main problem I have with Drupal right now is providing my customers with effective change management. Tracking changes in Drupal is *hard* in it's current form, as I have to track security problems not only in the main trunk, but also in each module that's installed. Now imagine having to do that for thousands of installations - it's nearly impossible, even with the benefit of Nessus and related scanners. Being able to platform manage packages is a near necessity in these types of environments, and companies using these environments are an important component of the Drupal community ecosystem. Look, the original request is, "I need you to change package version numbers when you make changes to the underlying tar files." It's positively INSANE to me that there is any debate on this point, as this is standard practice in package management and software engineering. If Debian has a problem with retrieving a new tar file for every single Drupal version that comes out (as any distro that isn't updated frequently will have), it's ALSO important that we add a drupal-current.tar or module-current.tar file to the repo so we can build that into package scripts for users that are interested in running the latest regardless of version. Drupal maintainers have a responsibility to members of this community to fix this practice immediately. Not only would it benefit Drupal in a myriad of ways (package management being a "Big One", but there are many more), it will help adopters of the platform deal with the complexity, and pave the way down the line for systems that remove some of that complexity and help end-users, especially as the practice essentially violates best practice in Software Development and eliminates the possibility of any kind of "real" change management. James Walker and I have talked about the need to build packages, and we would love to see Gentoo, Debian, CentOS, and other organizations get this capability - I don't think the impact to Drupal adoption should be discounted. I hope this appeals to some of you - it's very important. And I cannot back up Dries enough in his position.
It is sad to see this discussion side-tracked. The purpose of this discussion is NOT to debate why packagers exist (that is not what Seemant asked for), but to figure out how we can better cooperate. The world doesn't care about your opinion about packagers; whatever it is you think about them, they are not going to go away. So if you're not going to help make Drupal better for packagers, don't add noise to the discussion either. It would be a waste of time and bits. Thanks.
This isn't a sidetrack; it's an important point. If the current project descriptions will be overwritten by the .info files, then there's no point spending time now cleaning up the text itself. There's still tagging needing to be done, but I don't want to be changing the ? project description if it's all getting wiped out soon.
It's a good point, but it really is sidetracked from the original request. Also, you're directly ignoring Dries' polite request not to add noise to the discussion (I'm not singling you out personally). This point should be a separate thread.
Seemant: as mentioned, the repackage issue will be fixed in the near feature. Anything else that we could do to make things easier on your side? If so, I'd love to learn more about it, so we can work on it.
Seriously, and get in touch with me. We're heavy Gentoo addicts, and would love to assist you in any way we can. We'd be happy to contribute to any initiative to make Drupal ebuilds under Gentoo more usable. Jonathan Lambert FireBright, Inc.
(Thanks for Gentoo. I'm a long time Gentoo user.)
-- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/
Note: I changed the topic so I don't derail the distro thread with this Moshe said:
It is sad to see this discussion side-tracked. The purpose of this discussion is NOT to debate why packagers exist (that is not what Seemant asked for), but to figure out how we can better cooperate. The world doesn't care about your opinion about packagers; whatever it is you think about them, they are not going to go away. So if you're not going to help make Drupal better for packagers, don't add noise to the discussion either. It would be a waste of time and bits. Thanks.
Michelle said:
This isn't a sidetrack; it's an important point. If the current project descriptions will be overwritten by the .info files, then there's no point spending time now cleaning up the text itself. There's still tagging needing to be done, but I don't want to be changing the ? project description if it's all getting wiped out soon.
Jonathan said:
It's a good point, but it really is sidetracked from the original request. Also, you're directly ignoring Dries' polite request not to add noise to the discussion (I'm not singling you out personally). This point should be a separate thread.
Excuse me? I did no such thing. This email you are quoting is from my "Documenting contribs" thread and has nothing to do with the linux distros. I certainly hope you're not suggesting the dev list be confined to one discussion thread at a time. I seriously doubt that's what Dries had in mind with his request. Michelle
On Oct 25, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Jonathan Lambert wrote:
Look, the original request is, "I need you to change package version numbers when you make changes to the underlying tar files." It's positively INSANE to me that there is any debate on this point, as this is standard practice in package management and software engineering.
there's no debate on this point at all (at least, not anymore). it's all done and ready to deploy. it's just pending: a) further reviews by The Blessed Few(tm) b) documentation please, read http://drupal.org/node/90436 and the links in there for more on this before you write anything else about this topic.
Drupal maintainers have a responsibility to members of this community to fix this practice immediately.
[climbs onto soap box] before you go throwing ultimatums around, you should consider how much time it actually took me to get this right. i started grumbling about this in january, vocally ranting about it in april, winning support for my plans around then (no small task in its own right), raising money (since my day job isn't drupal at all, and i couldn't just take a few hundred hours of time off without pay) in august, and hacking the code in earnest in september. here it is, end of october, and it's finally done. i challenge you to find anyone who would have accomplished all of this any better or faster. i just find it slightly offensive that you a) think this was a trivial matter to change and drupal maintainers were just dragging their feet because they didn't want drupal included in distros and b) are now telling us how irresponsible we're being unless we fix this immediately (which, by the way, is going to happen on the order of days from now, anyway). if you're going to make a rant, at least make an informed one. ;) better yet, instead of complaining about all the work you (wrongly) think we're not doing, please help contribute in some way ($, documentation, testing, code, whatever you're good at). [off soap box]
It's a good point, but it really is sidetracked from the original request. Also, you're directly ignoring Dries' polite request not to add noise to the discussion (I'm not singling you out personally). This point should be a separate thread.
it *was* in a separate thread. to single you out personally, you're the one that put any mention of michelle's thread about documenting projects into here... ;) all that said, i hold no personal grudge, and i don't want to add any more flames or distractions in this thread... versioned (and tagged) tarballs for contrib are an imminent reality for drupal, end of story. to people who know what they're talking about: what else do you want/ need from drupal to make distribution easier for you? thanks, -derek (dww) p.s. sorry for the harsh tone. i've just poured so many hours of my life into this exact point that i'm a little touchy around this topic... please don't take it personally.
I did not mean offense - I wasn't aware of your efforts! I'm taking this thread off list to talk to you personally Derek as it appropriate here. Consider my part of this thread closed. -- Jonathan Lambert Principal | FireBright, Inc. Email: j@firebright.com -------------------------------------------------- "In any contest between power and patience, bet on patience." - W.B. Prescott On Oct 25, 2006, at 3:42 PM, Derek Wright wrote:
On Oct 25, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Jonathan Lambert wrote:
Look, the original request is, "I need you to change package version numbers when you make changes to the underlying tar files." It's positively INSANE to me that there is any debate on this point, as this is standard practice in package management and software engineering.
there's no debate on this point at all (at least, not anymore).
it's all done and ready to deploy. it's just pending:
a) further reviews by The Blessed Few(tm) b) documentation
please, read http://drupal.org/node/90436 and the links in there for more on this before you write anything else about this topic.
Drupal maintainers have a responsibility to members of this community to fix this practice immediately.
[climbs onto soap box]
before you go throwing ultimatums around, you should consider how much time it actually took me to get this right. i started grumbling about this in january, vocally ranting about it in april, winning support for my plans around then (no small task in its own right), raising money (since my day job isn't drupal at all, and i couldn't just take a few hundred hours of time off without pay) in august, and hacking the code in earnest in september. here it is, end of october, and it's finally done. i challenge you to find anyone who would have accomplished all of this any better or faster.
i just find it slightly offensive that you a) think this was a trivial matter to change and drupal maintainers were just dragging their feet because they didn't want drupal included in distros and b) are now telling us how irresponsible we're being unless we fix this immediately (which, by the way, is going to happen on the order of days from now, anyway). if you're going to make a rant, at least make an informed one. ;) better yet, instead of complaining about all the work you (wrongly) think we're not doing, please help contribute in some way ($, documentation, testing, code, whatever you're good at).
[off soap box]
It's a good point, but it really is sidetracked from the original request. Also, you're directly ignoring Dries' polite request not to add noise to the discussion (I'm not singling you out personally). This point should be a separate thread.
it *was* in a separate thread. to single you out personally, you're the one that put any mention of michelle's thread about documenting projects into here... ;)
all that said, i hold no personal grudge, and i don't want to add any more flames or distractions in this thread...
versioned (and tagged) tarballs for contrib are an imminent reality for drupal, end of story.
to people who know what they're talking about: what else do you want/need from drupal to make distribution easier for you?
thanks, -derek (dww)
p.s. sorry for the harsh tone. i've just poured so many hours of my life into this exact point that i'm a little touchy around this topic... please don't take it personally.
Hi all, On 25-Oct-06 13:32, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
Debian has apparently a policy to never add new features to a stable Debian release, only bug fixes. But since Debian's release cycle is much longer than Drupal's this leads to problems. Drupal's stable release is 4.7 and 4.5 was released about two years ago.
Debian's policy works great for system level stuff, but in the world of Drupal (and other fast-paced systems), it's not exactly ideal. This is exactly why backports.org exists. Packaging Drupal up will give end-users the ability to try out Drupal with ease. Heaven forbid, that they don't like it and have to uninstall it. Bring on some intelligent packaging! -- Sammy Spets Synerger Pty Ltd http://synerger.com
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 12:29 +0200, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
Our relationship with people packaging Drupal has also been rather problematic. ;p
I hope not with Gentoo...
Also, before you consider doing any package you should check if your distribution's release policy matches Drupal's. As a result of such a check not being done, Debian ships now with a Drupal 4.5 package which isn't maintained by us anymore.
Not sure what you mean here -- Gentoo tends to be a moving target, so if 4.6 gets deemed as the new upstream stable, Gentoo devs tend to follow up on that in the distro itself (in most cases, anyway).
Debian has apparently a policy to never add new features to a stable Debian release, only bug fixes. But since Debian's release cycle is much longer than Drupal's this leads to problems. Drupal's stable release is 4.7 and 4.5 was released about two years ago.
So if Gentoo accepts new features into its new releases, then this won't be a problem.
This is not a thing developers themselves can do anything about. The problem is with our way of packaging things. Luckily, this should change soon and from there on tarballs once created should be stable.
Being completely new to the world of drupal, I'm not sure I understand the packaging method or the changes in store. Can you point me to a doc where I may learn more?
http://drupal.org/node/77562 http://drupal.org/node/90436
Also, when will these changes happen?
Soon(tm)
Actually, some have already happened. The rest might happen this or next week.
Oh, and a final word from me: Please don't simply package modules *because* *you* *can*. Contrib is not reviewed in any way. Modules may have serious security holes. Modules may even be abandoned. So first evaluate the modules you want to package.
Cheers, Gerhard, wearing his contrib-CVS admin hat
would it be possible to change tarball versions when the contents change?
....
Thanks! -- Seemant Kulleen Developer, Gentoo Linux
Seconded. I can't believe that anyone actually does change a release without upping the release number. This is important for everyone - not just gentoo people or packaging people. Alex
participants (12)
-
alex＠owal.co.uk -
Boerland, Bert -
Bèr Kessels -
Derek Wright -
Dries Buytaert -
Gerhard Killesreiter -
James Walker -
Jonathan Lambert -
Konstantin Käfer -
Michelle Cox -
Sammy Spets -
Seemant Kulleen