[Scummvm-devel] 0.7.0 re-tagged & tarballs available

[Max Horn]

Am 23.12.2004 um 22:17 schrieb Arisme:

> Travis Howell wrote:
>> From: "James 'Ender' Brown" <ender at scummvm.org>
>>> Everythings been fixed, and the release has been retagged. So feel  
>>> free
>>> to go start making/uploading your bins! :)
>>>
>>> New source code:
>>> http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/scummvm/scummvm 
>>> -0.7.0.tar.bz2
>>> http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/scummvm/scummvm 
>>> -0.7.0.tar.gz
>>> http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/scummvm/scummvm-0.7.0.zip
>> ScummVM and tools 0.7.0 Windows binaries have been uploaded to  
>> SourceForge.
>
> WinCE ARM port uploaded (I'll build the other architectures if people  
> request them, since there are no testers ...)

Thanks!

>
> scummvm-0.7.0-PocketPC2003_and_Smartphone2003.zip
> scummvm-0.7.0-PocketPC_ARM_and_Smartphone2002.zip
>
> (you'll have to state on the download page that it's the same  
> executable for PocketPC 2003 / Smartphone 2003 (Windows Mobile 2003) |  
> and the same executable for PocketPC 2002 / Smartphone 2002)

OK, so I am wondering, why those filenames, aren't they a bit  
inconsistent? How about:

  summvm-0.7.0-PocketPC2002_and_Smartphone2002_ARM.zip
  summvm-0.7.0-PocketPC2003_and_Smartphone2003_ARM.zip

or just

  summvm-0.7.0-PocketPC2002_ARM.zip
  summvm-0.7.0-PocketPC2003_ARM.zip

or

  summvm-0.7.0-WinME2002_ARM.zip
  summvm-0.7.0-WinME2003_ARM.zip

or... well you get the idea.

That way, if we decide to release MIPS or SH3 binaries later, the  
filenames are no problem.


Cheers,

Max