On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 03:06:39PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > I would like to see policy forbid the use of commit hashes in versions. > They aren't ordered,
This seems like an odd reason to forbid them; should one also forbid strings such as 'pre', 'rc', 'lenny', 'squeeze' in version numbers also because they aren't ordered? Clearly they should only be used some way towards the right-hand end of the version number, with appropriate additional ordering hints before them, so that no false ordering is inferred, but that's a very different matter. Maybe policy should instead recommend explicitly that such ordering hints should accompany hashes. > and the information about exactly which commit the > snapshot was can be included in the changelog. True, but since git revisions can actually do much the same thing as the other typical components of a version string; that is, uniquely identify the set of changes making up a code archive, the version string does sound like the best place to put this sort of information. > Mercurial revision numbers should not be used either as they are not > consistent between repositories (they really were a stupid idea in a > distributed VCS). That does sound like a good reason to discourage use of Mercurial revision numbers. Dominic. -- Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/ PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110423225208.gk4...@urchin.earth.li
