>>>>> On Fri, 4 Nov 2016, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 11/03/2016 05:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> == Policy changes? == >> I think that the following new policies could make sense: >> >> 1. Revision number must be no longer than 9999:
> You likely mean "no higher than 9999", longer than would give large > values The wording would be similar to "no longer than 4 digits". >> 1a. to make <=X-r9999 reliable, >> 1b. to prevent pathological uses of revision as date. > Given revision in most cases is incremental (except for some -r100, > -r200) cases, some structure here is likely good. I take it we're > talking about devmanual changes in this case for policy? Yes, it would be purely devmanual/tree policy. PMS will still mandate that the package manager can handle arbitrary long versions. Looks like using multiples of 100 is best practice if there is the same PV in different slots. Not sure if we should codify that somewhere. (If nobody contradicts, this message could be used as future policy reference, though. :) Ulrich
pgplaCg2C9bC_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
