Hi Gerald,
Gerald Combs ezt írta (időpont: 2025. jan. 10., P, 1:23):
>
> On 1/7/25 6:20 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> > Hi Gerald,
> >
> > Gerald Combs ezt írta (időpont: 2024. dec. 31., K,
> > 0:37):
> >>
> >> Our current tag syntax wasn't really based on a grand plan. As described at
> >>
> >> h
On 1/7/25 6:20 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
Hi Gerald,
Gerald Combs ezt írta (időpont: 2024. dec. 31., K, 0:37):
Our current tag syntax wasn't really based on a grand plan. As described at
https://lists.wireshark.org/archives/wireshark-dev/201401/msg00194.html
the "wireshark-" tags were created
Hi Gerald,
Gerald Combs ezt írta (időpont: 2024. dec. 31., K, 0:37):
>
> Our current tag syntax wasn't really based on a grand plan. As described at
>
> https://lists.wireshark.org/archives/wireshark-dev/201401/msg00194.html
>
> the "wireshark-" tags were created during the migration from Subvers
Our current tag syntax wasn't really based on a grand plan. As described at
https://lists.wireshark.org/archives/wireshark-dev/201401/msg00194.html
the "wireshark-" tags were created during the migration from Subversion to git, and the "v" tags were created
afterward to tag our releases and rel
Hi,
How much conflict would it create to ‘enhance’ the tag format throughout? I’m
not particularly found of having a temporal influence on the format.
Would the following work, avoiding ambiguity:
- Release tags: wireshark-x.y.z / stratoshark-x.y.z
- Release tags: wsvx.y.z / ssvx.y.z
- RC tags:
