X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	Juan Manuel Guerrero <juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: ANNOUNCE: release 3 of the DJGPP port of GNU grep 2.5.3 uploaded.
Date:	Mon, 21 Jan 2008 05:06:43 -0800 (PST)
Organization:	http://groups.google.com
Lines:	40
Message-ID:	<4c6759dd-f536-49ea-8d8b-a2feb5192d77@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>
References:	<200801202022 DOT m0KKMLg0001310 AT delorie DOT com> <47941ACF DOT B8EBD95B AT yahoo DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	88.68.55.187
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	posting.google.com 1200920804 20614 127.0.0.1 (21 Jan 2008 13:06:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:06:44 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To:	groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info:	f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.68.55.187;
	posting-account=OsAajgoAAADdKJnkJkmhzqP0jo6I_P_0
User-Agent:	G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us)
	AppleWebKit/48 (like Gecko) Safari/48,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

CBFalconer schrieb:
> Juan Manuel Guerrero wrote:
> >
> ... snip ...
> >
> > The binaries, docs and surces can be downloaded from
> > ftp.delorie.com and mirrors as(timestamp 2008-01-20):
> >
> >     grep 2.5.3 binaries, info and man format documentation:
> >     ftp://ftp.delorie.com/pub/djgpp/current/v2gnu/grep253b.zip
>
> I already downloaded, and am running, grep 2.5.3 for djgpp.  I
> downloaded it sometime last August.  So either you have made a
> mistake, or you should have modified the name for a later port.

Sorry, but I do not understand this.  There have been 3 releases or
updates of the port of grep 2.5.3.  These were necessary to fix bugs
and pending issues.  AFAIK it was always the rule to follow that
the new update or release replaces the old one; there is absolutly
no reason to keep a broken or unfinished version of the port.
Because the new release replaces the old one there is also
no reason to give the new release a different name than the
old one.  This is the politics that has been followed all the years.
E.G. look at fileutils (fil41*.zip) it is release 7 as can be seen
by inspection of the dsm file, and it has still the same zip
file name than the first release.  I only make a new release
of a port if there is a serious reason to do it; in that case
the old one is replaced and the new release
is announced allowing the user to update if he want.
I never silently replace an old release with a new one.
The current naming scheme is that it must fulfill the
8.3 DOS filename restriction so usualy there is no space
left for some release info.  Any necessary release info is
given in the announcement and in the dsm file.
If you prefer a different naming convention it will be ok
with me but in that case discuss it DJ and not with me.
If he changes the rules I will follow the new ones.

Regards,
Juan M. Guerrero

- Raw text -