On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 02:13:17PM +0100, Sebastien Marie wrote: > Caspar Schutijser <[email protected]> writes: > > > Hey, > > > > I'm doing a build right now to check the diff. But wouldn't it be > > better to name it 0.9.0.20231108 instead of 0.9.1.20231108? Because > > if they release 0.9.1, we'd need EPOCH to make that work, right? > > > > Please note that packages-spec(7) permits several extra suffix to avoid > clashes with upstream versioning: > > - patchlevel: 0.9.0pl20231108 (< 0.9.1) > - pre: 0.9.1pre20231108 (< 0.9.1) > > The full list in order is: rcN, alphaN, betaN, preN, [normal version], plN > > And the full doc is in packages-spec(7) man page as usual.
Something like that would be even better, indeed. Thanks. Greg: the build succeeded so OK caspar@, provided that you change the version number as proposed by semarie@. Caspar > -- > Sebastien Marie
