On Fri Sep 23 19:08:44 2016 GMT+0200, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: > On 09/23/2016 01:05 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > <top post> > > If there's another RC, please follow the naming convention that we > > agreed on in the dim, distant past of 3.9.0rcX. > > > > Note the .0 in there. > > > > 3.9rcX (without the .0) is mildly annoying from a packaging perspective. > > > > And be sure that the GA is tagged and released as 3.9.0. > > > > We do have a history of using both 3.9rcX and 3.9.0rcX in the past. But > > please stick to the One True convention of 3.9.0rcX. > > > > > > We tried to keep it as close as possible to 3.8 > > v3.8rc0 > > v3.8rc1 > > v3.8rc2 > > v3.9rc0 > > v3.9rc1 > > ... > > > > Yes, that was annoying then too. > > > > Do you want this to be changed in future? > > Yes please.
Whatever is picked, make sure that the 3.9.0 version is seen as newer. You can use the rpmdev-vercmp command to verify that. Thanks! > > -- > > Kaleb > _______________________________________________ > packaging mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging > -- Sent from my Jolla w/ the Open Source friendly services from kolabnow.com _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
