[15:57]  <_koshi_> current debian packaging of engine only allows one installed version at a time
[15:57]  <_koshi_> linux package management means as soon as the package is in the repo, users can get it
[15:57]  <_koshi_> replacing currently installed
[15:57]  ** [LAN]KALAKA joined the channel.
[15:58]  <_koshi_> therefore I can only publish the new packages when the version is actually live on server
[15:58]  <[LCC]jK> spring's install system would need to be changed
[15:58]  <[LCC]jK> (either append version to filename or by using /opt)
[15:58]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> koshi asked for a heads up about one day in advance for the reasons he already explained
[15:59]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> clearly an error of you jk, as i see it
[15:59]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> not related to ueberserver or anything
[15:59]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> not too bad now, as he was here
[16:01]  <[LCC]jK> that was must have been then some undocumented arrangement between you and koshi
[16:01]  <_koshi_> packages are published now btw, but launchpad isn't exactly reliable wrt that or position in queue
[16:01]  <[LCC]jK> as said couldn't you compile it before, and masking it and unmasking it later?
[16:01]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> you were here in chat togehter with us two, about a week ago ro so, when he requested it
[16:02]  <tvo@IRC>  Technically the packages could be versioned, like kernels, right? Bunch of extra work though, I suppose.
[16:02]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> could also be 2 or 3 or 4 weeks :D
[16:03]  <_koshi_> yeah, tvo
[16:03]  <_koshi_> and I already despise packaging
[16:05]  <_koshi_> and then it would only be a special case for debian
[16:06]  <_koshi_> fedora might do it diffently yet again
[16:06]  <_koshi_> and I simply don't have the motivation to get people together to make it uniform
[16:06]  <tvo@IRC>  yeah, you'd need versioned packages there too
[16:06]  <_koshi_> and then have yet more work to make it work in SL on both win and linux
[16:07]  <tvo@IRC>  I think Spring build sys doesn't even support this in a way acceptable to packagers
[16:07]  <tvo@IRC>  unless all versions would conflict with each other
[16:07]  <tvo@IRC>  otherwise the binaries would have to be /usr/bin/spring-87.0 /usr/bin/spring-86.0 probably
[16:07]  <_koshi_> which is the situation we have now, minus the automatic superseding
[16:07]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> launcher branch?
[16:07]  ** [BoS]nixtux joined the channel.
[16:08]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> not that i had committed anything to it yet :D
[16:08]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> for real
[16:08]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> but there is some uncommitted stuff
[16:08]  <[ARP]hoijui_irc> locally
[16:08]  <tvo@IRC>  _koshi_, not entirely, it would be better because new version could be build in advance, and people could just apt-get install spring-87 when it goes live
[16:09]  <tvo@IRC>  which would automagically erase spring-86 cause of the conflict (I think)
[16:09]  <tvo@IRC>  but yeah, ultimately a bunch of work for a tiny half-working solution :-)
[16:09]  <_koshi_> yeah, but that's not for the stupid user :)