Bug 54588

Summary: Why ship Storable-0.6.11 (beta) instead of Storable-1.0.13 (release) ?
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Public Beta Reporter: Need Real Name <rhbz>
Component: perl-StorableAssignee: Chip Turner <cturner>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: roswell   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2001-12-06 21:23:49 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Need Real Name 2001-10-13 10:29:39 UTC 
The Storable.pm shipped with redhat is over a year old and marked as beta.

;# Revision 0.6.1.11  2000/04/02 21:44:33  ram
;# patch11: increased version number

[ snip ]

;# Revision 0.6  1998/06/04  16:08:20  ram
;# Baseline for first beta release.

whereas the version on CPAN has

;# $Log: Storable.pm,v $
;# Revision 1.0.1.12  2001/08/28 21:51:51  ram
;# patch13: fixed truncation race with lock_retrieve() in lock_store()

[ snip ]

;# Revision 1.0  2000/09/01 19:40:41  ram
;# Baseline for first official release.

Is there any reason why you ship a beta when there's an official release 
for over a year ?
Comment 1 Chip Turner 2002-04-11 00:25:44 UTC 
the latest skipjack beta, and rawhide, now ship Storable 1.0.14.