[argyllcms] Re: ArgyllCMS V1.1.0 RC2 is now available

  • From: Richard Hughes <hughsient@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:28:32 +0000

2009/12/10 Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>        I'm not very happy about the idea that there is something
> called "ArgyllCMS 1.1.0 RC2" out there that doesn't actually behave
> exactly like ArgyllCMS 1.1.0 RC2.

I'm thinking of doing the same for Fedora -- pushing in the udev
changes, ripping out the custom libusb stuff and that sort of thing.
Would it be okay for me to generate a tarball called
hargyll-1.1.0-rc2? so people don't get confused? I can use any other
prefix or suffix (or name) if you want.

I _don't_ want to fork Argyll, I just wanting a single UNIXy tarball
that I can sync with your releases every few months that is suitable
for distros to just slurp up.


Other related posts: