Hi, On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 03:51:15PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> writes: > > > + <p> > > + The upstream version number must not include a non-linear > > + revision ID or hash, since it cannot help in ordering > > + versions and it tends to result in very long version > > + numbers and filenames. This information may be recorded > > + in the changelog instead. > > + </p>
It is a bit detailed and lacks limitation for length but I think it is a good start. The above goes to as 3.2.2 as I understand. We already have "3.2.1 Version numbers based on dates" and fits nicely into the context. Let's add this. > I don't think it's Policy's place to tell people that they can't use > hashes because they *might* result in long version numbers. They usually > don't. This is another topic. I do not think everyone agreed yet to a particular set of numbers. The more I looked into this issue, I think followings are the possible numbers: * package file name for normal uploads: 90 characters (must) - rationale: UCS-2 requirement etc. - current longest is 76 chars. - this number is ready for policy. * package name length <=40 (must: 99.8% qualifies) * package name length <=30 (should: 98.3% qualifies) - aptitude field length default normal version length withour special extension such as +nmu? +b? ... should be: * version length <=30 (must: 99.9% qualifies) <=20 (must: 99.0% qualifies) possible alternative. * version length <=15 (should: 95.3% qualifies) - aptitude field length default can be 15 as BTS #624542 for 80 char/line - 10 is too short since only 83.8% qualifies. I understand some may feel general recommendation to be in "Developer's reference" in general as: 5.11.2. NMUs and debian/changelog http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu-changelog This only talk about NMU versioning. 6.3. Best practices for debian/changelog http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-debian-changelog These are a bit more guidance than limiting version number for what we can use. > If we have a version number length restriction, or an overall filename > length restriction, we should just say that, and point out that using > hashes may make it hard to meet the restriction. If we do this, we also need to move 3.2.1 to developers-reference. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110501003325.ga3...@debian.org