From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48751) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dROHN-0001r8-Ma for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2017 15:42:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dROHK-0001mF-JJ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2017 15:42:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45288) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dROHK-0001m8-G0 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2017 15:42:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dROHK-0006RP-1Q for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jul 2017 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#27546] [PATCH] Add wine stable release Resent-Message-ID: From: Nicolas Goaziou In-Reply-To: <20170701173817.GA29000@jasmine.lan> (Leo Famulari's message of "Sat, 1 Jul 2017 13:38:17 -0400") References: <87zico2x1l.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <20170701173817.GA29000@jasmine.lan> Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2017 21:41:37 +0200 Message-ID: <87k23s0wsu.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Leo Famulari Cc: 27546@debbugs.gnu.org Hello, Leo Famulari writes: > On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 01:53:26PM +0200, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Not so long ago, I realized, painfully, we were distributing development >> version of wine (currently 2.11), but not the stable one (currently >> 2.0.1). >> >> The following patch attempts to provide the missing release. Ideally, >> I think this variable should be named "wine" and the other "wine-dev" or >> some such. However, so as to limit fuss, this patches leaves "wine" >> as-is, and introduce "wine-2.0.1" instead. > > Since we don't typically package development releases, how about > removing 2.11 and replacing it with 2.0.1? Thank you for the review. I do not mind, for all I need is the stable release. However, I'm not the one who packaged wine in the first place. Maybe its author has a different use case. Anyway, the patch implements the less invasive solution. We can also apply it for now and settle on the next stable release, whenever it happens. Note that we have other packages in the same situation (e.g., lilypond). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738