[alsa-devel] alsa-lib 1.0.21a release
Hello,
I made a quick release 1.0.21a of the alsa-lib package to fix regression for the configuration parsing (makes some device names unavailable). These patches were included:
19abc37 PCM - Change the hw_params determination order d1b70af Change dmix.conf to accept user configuration from defaults.dmix.<driver_id>.xxx eb9ae58 Revert "Fix driver conf parsing in snd_config_hook_load_for_all_cards()" f0a32a6 mixer: Add Speaker and Beep names to the weight list
Jaroslav
----- Jaroslav Kysela perex@perex.cz Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer ALSA Project, Red Hat, Inc.
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 14:51 +0200, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
I made a quick release 1.0.21a of the alsa-lib package to fix regression for the configuration parsing (makes some device names unavailable).
Could you stick to numeric versions if possible please. Arbitrary postfixes like "a" or "b" are hard to express in the versioning scheme we use on ebuilds. This could be unique to portage, but I wanted to speak up in case it affects others as well. 1.0.21.1 may fit your "newer then 1.0.21; but not quite 1.0.22" needs.
Regards, Tony V. UNIX systems administrator London Internet Exchange (also a Gentoo developer that touches media-sound ebuilds)
Tony Vroon tony@linx.net writes:
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 14:51 +0200, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
I made a quick release 1.0.21a of the alsa-lib package to fix regression for the configuration parsing (makes some device names unavailable).
Could you stick to numeric versions if possible please. Arbitrary postfixes like "a" or "b" are hard to express in the versioning scheme we use on ebuilds. This could be unique to portage, but I wanted to speak up in case it affects others as well. 1.0.21.1 may fit your "newer then 1.0.21; but not quite 1.0.22" needs.
I've complained about this for years...
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Tony Vroon wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 12:19 +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
I've complained about this for years...
It wasn't deemed worthy a reply, so apparently nobody cares. Ah well.
I care, but it's sometimes difficult to change old habits ;-( I hope to remember new versioning scheme for a next release. The last ALSA release versions ending with a character are just quick fixes, so just increase the package release version for your distro and add a small patch with changes.
Jaroslav
----- Jaroslav Kysela perex@perex.cz Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer ALSA Project, Red Hat, Inc.
2009/9/21 Jaroslav Kysela perex@perex.cz:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Tony Vroon wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 12:19 +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
I've complained about this for years...
It wasn't deemed worthy a reply, so apparently nobody cares. Ah well.
I care, but it's sometimes difficult to change old habits ;-( I hope to remember new versioning scheme for a next release. The last ALSA release versions ending with a character are just quick fixes, so just increase the package release version for your distro and add a small patch with changes.
Jaroslav
One could just move to a 4 number scheme with the last number being minor fixes. Much like the linux kernel release numbers. What would have to change to move from ALSA 1.0.x.x to 1.1.x.x ? What would have to change to move from ALSA 1.x.x.x to 2.x.x.x
At Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:23:03 +0100, James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
2009/9/21 Jaroslav Kysela perex@perex.cz:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Tony Vroon wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 12:19 +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
I've complained about this for years...
It wasn't deemed worthy a reply, so apparently nobody cares. Ah well.
I care, but it's sometimes difficult to change old habits ;-( I hope to remember new versioning scheme for a next release. The last ALSA release versions ending with a character are just quick fixes, so just increase the package release version for your distro and add a small patch with changes.
Jaroslav
One could just move to a 4 number scheme with the last number being minor fixes. Much like the linux kernel release numbers. What would have to change to move from ALSA 1.0.x.x to 1.1.x.x ?
IMO, when some major API additions/changes go in.
What would have to change to move from ALSA 1.x.x.x to 2.x.x.x
Similarly, when the whole API get changed. But, this would happen rarely, I guess :)
Takashi
At Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:18:57 +0200 (CEST), Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Tony Vroon wrote:
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 12:19 +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
I've complained about this for years...
It wasn't deemed worthy a reply, so apparently nobody cares. Ah well.
I care, but it's sometimes difficult to change old habits ;-( I hope to remember new versioning scheme for a next release. The last ALSA release versions ending with a character are just quick fixes, so just increase the package release version for your distro and add a small patch with changes.
Heh, I might be the first bad guy who introduced an alphabetic suffix at the time of ALSA 0.5.x :)
I agree, however, that a digit version number would work better for many packagers.
Takashi
participants (5)
-
James Courtier-Dutton -
Jaroslav Kysela -
Takashi Iwai -
Thierry Vignaud -
Tony Vroon