Re: Possible emergency gtk+ release

[Tim Janik <timj gtk org>]

On 1 Apr 2002, Jonathan Blandford wrote:

> Hi Tim,
> 
> Just before 2.0.1 was released, a patch went in that inadvertently broke
> GtkTreeModelSort.  This is resulting in lots of bugs in the current
> GNOME Beta from people who use that object.  We can do two things:
> 
> 1) Quickly put out a 2.0.1.1 that fixes this bug

nope, this basically breaks the advantages we get out of
versioning:
- programs that break due to 2.0.1 can't depend on the fixed gtk
  version
- modules can't depend on the new release
- there's no official tarball that libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.0.2 corresponds
  to (bad, especially for bug reports in third-party apps)

> 2) Put out a 2.0.2

> Tim, if we make a 2.0.1.1 release, is changing VERSION to explicitly be
> 2.0.1.1 sufficient in configure.in (while keeping GTK_MAJOR_VERSION,
> GTK_MINOR_VERSION, and GTK_MICRO_VERSION at 2, 0, 1).  Will this cause
> other problems?

VERSION is special cased and used in a couple places, and releasing
2.0.1.1 is bad for the reasons mentioned above.

i've put up a tentative 2.0.2 release at

	http://www.gtk.org/~timj/gtk+-2.0.2.tar.gz

i'd apprechiate if people could give it some testing.
gtk gets out of sync with glib this way, but that's not too bad, we can simply
jump the glib version number by 2 next time, so we'll have glib-2.0.3 and
gtk+-2.0.3 in sync again.

need to leave for university now, i'll release the above tarball in a couple
of hours if no more problems arise.

> 
> Thanks,
> -Jonathan
> 

---
ciaoTJ