[pkg-wine-party] Looking for feedback: changing the -unstable in wine-unstable

Michael Gilbert mgilbert at debian.org
Wed Apr 16 03:02:12 UTC 2014


Thanks for the feedback.

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Scott Leggett  wrote:
>> I've also thought about swapping the naming of two wine packages to
>> end up with wine-stable and wine, but that might be too disruptive.
> I think that this probably is too disruptive, and surprising behaviour
> for users. Upstream recommended usage is to try your app using the
> stable version, and only upgrade if you run into issues [0].

I'm not sure that it's that clear.  That faq [0] seems to push users
more toward the development version, I think, with statements like and
"Use the version that works best with the particular applications you
want to run. In most cases, this will be the latest development
version;" and "Note that user support for the stable branch is limited
to the ability to file AppDB test reports."

On the other hand, the ubuntu page seems to push more towards the
stable release [1] and strangely calls 1.7 a beta instead of

Anyway, it's still not clear to me which is right.  More opinions from
debian users would help.  Should the plain wine package be stable wine
or development wine?

> As for naming, I think that "wine" and "wine-development" are accurate
> and unambiguous. This also has the benefit of matching upstream
> terminology. The length of the names seems fairly unimportant - this is
> why we have tab completion! :)
> Anyway, from an appreciative user, thanks for your work on packaging wine!

No problem :)

Best wishes,

[1] http://www.winehq.org/download/ubuntu

More information about the pkg-wine-party mailing list