Re: Debian packages (Re: What can I do to help?)

[Daniel Skarda]

Hello,

Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:
> Daniel Skarda <address@hidden> writes:
> > While I was browsing list of Debian packages, I noticed many
> > packages of development beta versions (sometimes even checkouts from
> > CVS). Though there was not package for libguile1.7. I do not
> > understand this "message" Guile developers want to send to potential
> > Guile users :-(please do not use Guile?)
> 
> How about the message: "please do not use (and link applications
> against) development versions of guile".

  I am sorry for my provocative and ungrateful writing. It seems I have to learn
how to write Debian packages so I could help and stop groaning. I have not look
in /usr/share/doc/ and I thought that guile*.deb packages are lonely orphans.
Thank you for maintaining guile packages.

  But I do not agree with you that Guile development versions should be hidden
from outside world. It should be released, but clearly marked as a development
version, which is unstable and it possible that its interface change in future.

  When fool shoots himself in his leg, even thought he was clearly warned, it
is his fault. If you want to think of all ways how fool can shoot himself in leg
and try to prevent it, it is very likely you spend a lot of time and resources,
but at the end you fail (and possibly you as a side effect prevent other people
to do something useful).

  IMHO to release a package for Guile development development version gives a
message: "Hey, this is new and exciting development version. It is unstable and
dangerous, but if you are brave enough, feel free to test it and join Guile
development." More eyes see more bugs and more brains have more ideas (however
crazy :-)

0.

ps: I have quickly browsed through CVS workbook directory but have I not seen
any schedule of 1.7.x development branch. What features will go to particular
1.7.x versions etc.

ps: Installing different guile versions with same prefix would cause conflicts. 
Are you going to use same "strategy" as Gtk+? (usr/include/gtk-1.2, 
/u/i/gtk-2.0 
etc..)