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
> 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.
Gimp-developer mailing list