-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 165
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
List of official devel/unstable branches #316
Comments
some gnome metapackages affected:
|
There could also be some general rules, e.g. checks for substrings like |
Sure, that's planned as well |
Listed packages should be fixed. Global rule for all rc/alpha/beta versions is not there yet |
It's there now. Not for |
Some GNOME packages listing unstable version (3.27):
Probably more but newer versions are not packaged https://repology.org/metapackages/?search=gnome&maintainer=&category=&inrepo=nix_unstable¬inrepo=&minspread=&maxspread= |
I've added these and some more rules. It's easier to get them raw from the database, using |
|
Also these:
|
|
Three more: |
Also |
Also |
Would be nice if you create new issues for future reports, as there are chances I may miss followups to this closed issue. Thank you! |
Also note to self: can get the list of more candidates for gnome devel versioning scheme with this query:
Or, more precise at the current moment:
|
bind newly switched to the scheme where even=stable and odd=unstable. https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-announce/2018-May/001092.html |
Yeah, I've seen the news, adding rule for this was on my list. Thanks for the report anyway! |
Fixed by repology/repology-rules#33 |
Let's collect a list of devel/unstable software branches, so when #170 is implemented it can be used to make stable branches not counted as outdated. We need
2\\..*
[0-9]+\\.0.*
,[0-9]+\\.[0-9]+\\.[1-9]
[0-9]+\\.[0-9]*[13579]\\..*
2\\.6\\..*
10\\..*
3\\.1\\..*
[0-9]+\\.[1-9].*
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: