From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Updating Perl to 5.23? Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 11:30:36 +0100 Message-ID: <874mfmzlmb.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87twnn3lnm.fsf@gnu.org> <8761031rha.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34822) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a83vP-0004pF-SU for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 05:30:44 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a83vM-0003Im-KF for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 05:30:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8761031rha.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Sat, 12 Dec 2015 18:55:45 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Alex Vong Cc: guix-devel ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) skribis: > Alex Vong skribis: > >> According to , >> perl uses the version scheme such that maintenance branches (ready for >> production use) are even numbers and development branches are odd >> numbers. Thus, 5.23 is a development branch. From this page >> , it seems Debian only >> packages maintenance branches. Perhaps it is too risky to package >> development branches (break a lot of things). How do you guys think? > > Very good point. So I guess we=E2=80=99d be targeting 5.22. Does the > 5.16 =E2=86=92 5.22 switch sound reasonable? I went ahead with the update in =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99, along with = a couple of determinism patches (commits 4de3507 and 4187fe7.) Ludo=E2=80=99.