Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: proposal for 'Downloads' wiki page

[James Busser]

On 8-Sep-08, at 11:11 AM, Gour wrote:

> I'd put direct wording: GNUmed-0.31 with the link to
>
> http://www.gnumed.de/downloads/client/0.3/GNUmed-client.0.3.1.tgz

Being done. I do note at

        http://www.gnumed.de/downloads/client/

that there exist there

        GNUmed-client.latest.tgz

which seems to correctly match

        http://www.gnumed.de/downloads/client/0.3/GNUmed-client.0.3.1.tgz

however /client/ also contains

        GNUmed-client.latest.exe

which seems to correspond to .exe version 0.3.0 and not 0.3.1

I am just wondering... if it is manual work and therefore subject to  
error to point people to extra copies that are named "latest" is  
there anything lost by pointing people directly to the newest  
specifically-named versions, at least that way there will be no risk  
of them being named "latest" when they are not, in fact, "latest".

I aim to regularly update the links from Download as soon as I am  
advised/aware of a new release.

Can we get rid of the copies called "latest" or are they needed for  
something scripted like the update-checker?