[Kroupware] Re: Kolab versioning, tarball and SRPM

[Bernhard Reiter]

I completely agree that the current versioning is confusing.
Telling you the story why it has grown this way
is not enough, we need to improve it.
Below you can read some explanations
and some bug reports I have created.

Thanks again for your support.
It is a Free Software project that
can only be so good as their participants. 


On Monday 05 January 2004 14:53, Andreas Gungl wrote:
> Am Monday 05 January 2004 14:23 schrieb Thomas Lotterer:
> > On Tue, Dec 23, 2003, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> > > To my knowledge there is no 1.14 version of Kolab Server.
> > > The last stable release by Erfrakon is 1.0.8.
> > > There also was a 1.0.9pre and some improvements
> > > in the CVS.

The idea was introduced to have a version number
for a specific combination of server components.
It must be possible to communicate about the revision
of Kolab that someone runs. 

> > > There are two possible points of confusion.
> > > 	The rpm of the webinterface is also called kolab.
> > >         Last release was 1.0.14.
> > >
> > >         Zfos builds test packages based on new OpenPGK
> > >         revisions. They unfortunately call their version kolab-1.0.14,
> > >         I don't quite know why.
> >
> > Well, OpenPKG and ZfOS pull off kolab by fetching
> > http://www.erfrakon.de/projects/kolab/download/kolab-server-1.0/src/
> > kolab-%{V_major}-%{version}.src.rpm where the spec file declares V_major
> > 1.0 and version 1.0.14
> >
> > I thought 1.0 is the kolab release and 1.0.14 represents some kolab
> > version. It seems I was wrong. According to your statement above it is
> > my understanding that 1.0 is the release of the kolab backend and 1.0.14
> > is the version of the kolab web administration interface. At least both
> > parts are included in the SRPM i'm talking about.

Giving the name of the package your action were sensible.
The problem of the naming is that the Kolab Server is more than just
one single package, it needs a certain combinations that is known
to work together. 

> > BTW there are "very few" (updated) tarballs
> > or RPMs available. It seems that kolab users have to use CVS to stay
> > current!?

When Erfrakon published src tarballs, they usually removed the old
ones, because the did not want to rename the directory
to save bandwidth for mirrors.

So the changelog is the place where you can at least find
out with some hassles, which combination of rpms will constitute
a Kolab Server version:
http://www.erfrakon.de/projects/kolab/download/kolab-server-1.0/src/Changelog

> I second Thomas. I had the same problems when I was asked what version I
> was using. Currently Kolab versioning is not understandable for people
> outside the active development process. So I suggest to please update the
> ftp directory names to reflect the release 

We need a solutions to keep the mirrors happy.

> and rename the kolab rpm to e.g.
> kolab-glue.rpm or whatever you think (but don't name it only kolab).

https://intevation.de/roundup/kolab/issue16


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2145 bytes
Desc: signature
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kroupware/attachments/20040107/693de1de/smime.bin