On Jan 22, 2022, at 09:22, Gabriel Rosenkoetter wrote:

>> If we stick with multiple perl versions, and the perl5 port to create the 
>> symlinks, then maybe it would indeed help reduce some confusion to change 
>> the perl5 port's version to 1.0, or a YYYYMMDD date, or anything else that 
>> is not the version of one of the perl ports.
> 
> I realize that I just sent an email stating the opposite, and I maintain that 
> "1.0" is a bad idea (because it'll eventually climb to being confusingly 
> similar with actual Perl version numbers),

There is precedent for using an arbitrary version 0.0 or 0.1 or 1.0; see for 
example our "select" ports:

port info --name --version name:_select$

I wasn't necessarily suggesting that the version should start at 0 or 1 and be 
increased when the perl version changes. The version could stay at 0 or 1 
forever, with just the revision increasing when needed.

> but using a POSIX date sounds very promising to me, and would avoid showing, 
> as above, both "5.28.3" and (something that expands to:) "5.34.0" applied to 
> the same port at the same time.

A date is what we use in several other ports when a version number is not 
readily available (such as a project that just commits changes to their 
repository and never releases stable versions) so there is precedent for this 
as well.


Reply via email to