Pierre HABOUZIT wrote:
I strongly recommend that you follow the "0.99+1.0beta4-1" scheme that
was suggested. Yes it's long, but it's also correct, flexible, and
proven. In summary, the format is
[last_stable_version]+[experimental_version]-[package_version]. Please
use it, starting with your existing packages, before they go into the
official archive. Now is the time to get things right.
sure, I agree it is way better, *but* there is users that already have
packages with versions in the current scheme, and it (sorry) sucks that
they have to downgrade to be up to date.
that's why I swear that after the 1.0 final I'll use this scheme, but
for the current betas I have to respect the previous "error" (since it's
indeed tasteless, but totally policy-compatible)
There were two points I was trying to make. One is that the format
"1.4+1.5beta3-1" is superior to your proposed "short" version
"1.4-1+beta3", which looks like trouble. The other is that it would be
best to switch to this format before entering the archive. I just want
to make sure you haven't overlooked the former.
-John
--
http://giftfile.org/ :: giftfile project
