<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "http://bugs.gentoo.org/bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="2.22.7"
          urlbase="http://bugs.gentoo.org/"
          maintainer="bugzilla@gentoo.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>122326</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2006-02-09 17:52 0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>latexsuite-1.5.20060124 (Update)</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2006-02-24 07:25:43 0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>Gentoo Linux</product>
          <component>Ebuilds</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Linux</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>enhancement</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</reporter>
          <assigned_to>vim@gentoo.org</assigned_to>
          

      

      
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-09 17:52:26 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Minor modifications from latexsuite-1.5.ebuild. Uses the latest released version which includes *many* bug fixes and enhancements (version 1.5 dates back to dec-2003). For details see the changelog at 
http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net/vimfiles/ftplugin/latex-suite/ChangeLog
The ebuild seems to work ok on my setup (x86, vim-6.4, gvim *not installed*, several other plugins installed), but I haven&apos;t done extensive testing.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-09 17:55:00 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Created an attachment (id=79398)
latexsuite-1.5.20060124 (Update)

</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-10 12:32:34 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Is there any reason upstream can&apos;t do a proper release?</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-10 13:45:05 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>I already asked to the mailing list about this and I am waiting for an answer. When/if I get an answer, I&apos;ll forward it here.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-11 19:00:26 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Below you&apos;ll find the answer given by the latexSuite package developer when asked about the package&apos;s version naming scheme. Acording to his answer, see below, the release named latexSuite20060124 corresponds to version 1.8.07. Note that he also considers the naming scheme based on the date more robust.

original mail follows
==================================================================

On 11/02/06 22:46, Srinath Avadhanula wrote:
&gt; The versioning scheme of vim-latex leaves a little to be desired. Of
&gt; late, there are two distinct ways to define the &quot;version&quot; of
&gt; vim-latex. One is the output of the :TVersion command which will show
&gt; you a number like 1.8.02 or something similar. The other is the date
&gt; on the actual file you download. The reason the release is made with
&gt; the time-stamp is that it was simply easier to make quick releases
&gt; this way. In particular, the download.inc PHP code just checks for the
&gt; latest file names of the pattern latexSuite200*.tar.gz and proceeds to
&gt; dynamically generate a link to them. All I need to do to make a
&gt; release is to make a CVS commit and do
&gt; 
&gt;   :make release
&gt; 
&gt; I have been pretty careful nowadays to keep updating the internal
&gt; version number (maintained in ftplugin/latex-suite/version.vim) after
&gt; every release. So you should be able to use either of the two as the
&gt; official &quot;version&quot;. Personally, the timestamp is a teensy bit more
&gt; robust because it  does not rely on me remembering to update
&gt; version.vim.
&gt; 
&gt; Thanks,
&gt; Srinath
&gt; 
&gt; On 2/10/06, jorges &lt;jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es&gt; wrote:
&gt; 
&gt;&gt;Hi,
&gt;&gt;I&apos;ve been using vim-latex for more than a year now, although there&apos;s
&gt;&gt;plenty of things I haven&apos;t used yet. Now, going to the purpose of this post:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;- Have you changed the version naming scheme? It seems that all recent
&gt;&gt;releases follow a different convention, i.e. latexSuite20060124, than
&gt;&gt;the, now old, previous ones, i.e. 1.5. This might seem like a dumb
&gt;&gt;question, but I ask because the linux distribution I use (Gentoo Linux)
&gt;&gt;still has version 1.5 as the latest *released* version. Is there a
&gt;&gt;conceptual distinction between the two naming schemes, i.e new features
&gt;&gt;vs. bug fixes release types? I want to have this clear before I try to
&gt;&gt;convince the maintainers to keep updating to the latests versions and
&gt;&gt;probably switching to the new naming scheme.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;Regards,
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;jorge</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-16 18:42:02 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Okay, guess we&apos;ll go with this then. Some things that will need changing:

* KEYWORDS should be dropped to all ~ on a bump
* DESCRIPTION is triggering the &quot;too loooonnnnng!&quot; warning. &quot;vim plugin: a comprehensive set of tools to view, edit and compile LaTeX documents&quot; says the same thing in fewer words.
* I&apos;m wondering whether we should just name the ebuild 200blah rather than including the 1.5. Problem is, if we do this and upstream switches to non-date versions, we&apos;re screwed.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-17 03:07:03 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>(In reply to comment #5)
&gt; Okay, guess we&apos;ll go with this then. Some things that will need changing:
&gt; 
&gt; * KEYWORDS should be dropped to all ~ on a bump
&gt; * DESCRIPTION is triggering the &quot;too loooonnnnng!&quot; warning. &quot;vim plugin: a
&gt; comprehensive set of tools to view, edit and compile LaTeX documents&quot; says the
&gt; same thing in fewer words.
OK, I attach a new version of the build including these changes. I am not sure wether you expected me to introduce them or not. If not, let me know for next time.
&gt; * I&apos;m wondering whether we should just name the ebuild 200blah rather than
&gt; including the 1.5. Problem is, if we do this and upstream switches to non-date
&gt; versions, we&apos;re screwed.
Naming the ebuild by the build date is the easiest, but you&apos;re right about the switch (it happened already, isn&apos;t it?). Another choice is to keep using the internal version number as was done until now, i.e. 1.8.07 for this release, but the problem somehow remains if the author *forgets* to update it and it might be confusing for the user because the vim-latex web site now *only* advertizes the build date. 
Combining both the internal version and the build date, i.e. this release would be 1.8.07.20060124 or something, would be more robust but also quite ugly.
I guess this is your call now. I left this part as it was before.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jorgesmbox-ml@yahoo.es</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-17 03:13:50 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Created an attachment (id=80002)
latexsuite-1.5.20060124 (Update)

* Dropped KEYWORDS to ~ for all platforms
* Reduced description lenght
All changes as adviced by ciaranm</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com</who>
            <bug_when>2006-02-24 07:25:43 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Thanks. I also switched to using versionator rather than hardcoding the 1.5.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
      
          <attachment
              isobsolete="1"
              ispatch="0"
              isprivate="0"
          >
            <attachid>79398</attachid>
            <date>2006-02-09 17:55 0000</date>
            <desc>latexsuite-1.5.20060124 (Update)</desc>
            <filename>latexsuite-1.5.20060124.ebuild</filename>
            <type>text/plain</type>
            <data encoding="base64">IyBDb3B5cmlnaHQgMTk5OS0yMDA1IEdlbnRvbyBGb3VuZGF0aW9uCiMgRGlzdHJpYnV0ZWQgdW5k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</data>        

          </attachment>
          <attachment
              isobsolete="0"
              ispatch="0"
              isprivate="0"
          >
            <attachid>80002</attachid>
            <date>2006-02-17 03:13 0000</date>
            <desc>latexsuite-1.5.20060124 (Update)</desc>
            <filename>latexsuite-1.5.20060124.ebuild</filename>
            <type>text/plain</type>
            <data encoding="base64">IyBDb3B5cmlnaHQgMTk5OS0yMDA1IEdlbnRvbyBGb3VuZGF0aW9uCiMgRGlzdHJpYnV0ZWQgdW5k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</data>        

          </attachment>
    </bug>

</bugzilla>