Re: [PATCH] ham/chirp update

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Ottavio Caruso <ottavio2006-usenet2012%yahoo.com@localhost> writes:

> What you say makes sense in principle, but in the case of chirp,
> upstream have decided they are going to release their packages as
> chirp-daily. I think the OP's approach probably makes more sense.
>
> From: https://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/wiki/Download
>
> "you do not need to worry about finding a stable version to run. You
> should always be on the latest build available."

I didn't mean to say we should definitel not package their snapshots.

But still, at:

  https://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/news

the latest news is "0.4.1 is released".  So upstream should resolve
their inconsistency issues.

I still think we should call it chirp-devel, so as not to pretend that
upstream follows release norms when they do not.