Track request for groestlcoin-core snap

Hello,

The command line and RPC as well as REST interface changes between major versions of Groestlcoin Core and thus we need different tracks for each branch (major version).

I kindly request the “2.18.2”, “2.19.1” and “2.20.1” track.

We follow the same support commitments as Bitcoin core: https://snapcraft.io/bitcoin-core

The groestlcoin-core snap: https://snapcraft.io/groestlcoin-core (id: UecH1fIojIW4ey6J00SxUk8VCdrcrIC1)

Best Regards,

Gruve

Hi there,

Backward (in)compatibility is typically a good use case for tracks. Can you provide more information about the track names and how those numbers map to major/minor/patch releases?

For example, 2.18.2, 2.19.1 and so on, look like patch versions. Will there be a 2.18.3? is that backward-incompatible with 2.18.2? If they are compatible then maybe you need 2.18, 2.19, 2.20 tracks instead; this more closely follows the pattern used by bitcoin-core which you mentioned you are similar to.

Let me know.

  • Daniel

Hello,

There won’t be a 2.18.3 nor a 2.19.2 unless very critical patch is needed so the next slated release would be 2.20.1 (https://github.com/Groestlcoin/groestlcoin/tree/2.20.1) which will be released in august.
The track names are based on our branches: https://github.com/Groestlcoin/groestlcoin/branches.
All tracks will be backwards incompatible.

We indeed should have requested 2.18, 2.19 and 2.20 similar as bitcoin-core because we follow the same pattern.

Hi,

I’m +1 on 2.18, 2.19 and 2.20 as track names which would contain 2.18.x, 2.19.x and 2.20.x patch versions as well, assuming that also works for you.

@reviewers, could some of you chime in on this request please?

Thanks!

  • Daniel
1 Like

Hello,

That works for us.

+1 to 2.18, 2.19 and 2.20 tracks.

1 Like

yay, I’ve created the 2.18, 2.19 and 2.20 tracks for this snap.

Enjoy!

  • Daniel
1 Like

Hello,

Thanks! Works fine now.