>>>>> On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Michał Górny wrote: > == Policy changes? == > I think that the following new policies could make sense:
> 1. Revision number must be no longer than 9999: > 1a. to make <=X-r9999 reliable, > 1b. to prevent pathological uses of revision as date. I think that we should consider restricting revisions to 4 digits. Real revisions (i.e., counted up from r0) in the tree seem to end somewhere around r30. Even with r100, r200 for different slots, a limit of 9999 shouldn't pose any problems. For date based versions, _pre or _p should be used, but not revisions. Note that this would be tree policy only (similar as the maximum length of 18 digits for version components is), but _not_ a restriction to be put in PMS. > 2. I think we could use a policy to make >=X_alpha reliable. > However, I have no clue how to word it without making it weird and > artificially restricting valid version numbers. Or rules concerning multiple suffixes are simple and straight forward, and they don't appear to be abused. Therefore, I would leave them alone. Ulrich
pgp05us6iPkmG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
