Andrew Deason <[email protected]> writes: > I don't think you can make that say something based on 1.6.1, since the > head of the 1.6.x branch right now is a different branch than 1.6.1. I > mean, if git-version said something like "this is 1.6.1 plus N patches", > that would be incorrect. Since, the head of 1.6.x is actually currently > "1.6.1pre2 plus N patches" (specifically 163, apparently), which is what > that says.
The problem is that most obvious ways of transforming that version number into a version number for packaging will result in a version number that sorts before 1.6.1, despite the fact that the code is after 1.6.1 conceptually. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
