On 14/03/16 11:30, aitor_czr wrote: > > On 03/13/2016 10:41 PM, Didier Kryn <[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree. And I think most people on this list would vote like me >> for a sequential version number rather than a date. However maybe Jude >> had the intent to start the numbering when he delivers a first official >> release. This might be the reason for prefixing with 0. May I suggest >> using the hash as a minor number and 0 as major? >> I'd suggest using a version like: 0.1.jude<date version>+<devuan release starting with 1>
That way when Jude does switch to versioned releases we can assume his version scheme easily assuming that he starts with > 0.1. -- Daniel Reurich Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd. 021 797 722
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
