On 5/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It might not be that important, but I think the year should be first and > > perhaps we might want to cut it down to 7.05. This way the version numbers > > are in order (compare: 05-2007 < 01-2008...) and a short number is easier > > to > > handle. > > The name should certainly be numerically sortable with expected results. > Generally a YYYYMMDD format is recommended. This could certainly be > modified to be more 'eye pleasing', but I would put a strong emphasis on > the need to be numerically date sortable.
Painting the bikeshed here, but I would say 2007<some delimiter>05 sounds absolutely fine, and it is extremely clear and sortable. Shortening the year has caused problems before, no need to do that. It also prevents any confusion (is 07-05 July 5th, May 2007, May 7th, etc.?). I think we've noted that a specific day is not important and our release schedule will never be that fast. -Dan _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
