Hi, Tor Lillqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How, exactly? Because the procedure for person doing a release would > be a few steps longer? Or because people would wonder why each other > version is missing when looking at some version history or ftp server > directory list? How are people supposed to know about this versioning scheme? Not all packages will use it; so how is a user supposed to know that even is stable, odd is some cvs snapshot? > > What about using something like gimp-2.2.8-cvs-20050523.zip for > > cvs snapshots? > > Well, for Win32 distributions of GIMP stuff, where such files are > handled manually, and/or people have "out-of-band" knowledge that > 2.2.8 wasn't released yet at 2005-05-23, that presumably is clear > enough. > > But if one considers various Unix/Linux package management software, > do they understand that for some packages "2.2.8-cvs-20050523" is > earlier than "2.2.8", but on the other hand, for some other package, > "1.2.3-cvs-20050523" would be later than "1.2.3" ? Well, then don't include a version number at all. That's how CVS snapshots are typically labelled, by nothing but the date. Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
