--On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 3:23 pm +0000 "Rev. Joseph Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 at 10:29:43AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: >> Brandon Mitchell has come up with a better scheme than my "numbering" >> alternative. Consider the following: >> >> 2.0.8pre1 2.0.8-0pre1 >> 2.0.8pre2 2.0.8-0pre2 >> 2.0.8 2.0.8-1 >> >> This has several advantages over my previous scheme. It preserves the >> upstream version information in "human readable form". It takes advantage >> of the fact that dpkg will create a source upload for -0 and -1 sequences. >> It naturally maintains the dpkg sequence ordering of the version numbers. >> It doesn't need to use epochs. > > It has one disadvantage I can see. The -0pre looks like it's something it's > not, but I believe people will figure it out, especially if the desc > contained real version info. Someone suggested this earlier in the discussion, and someone else pointed out that this is clearly against policy, since anything after the '-' should reflect debian-specific packaging changes, not upstream changes. Jules /----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd | | Jules aka | | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TW9 2TF *UK* | +----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \----------------------------------------------------------------------/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
