On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Igor Gnatenko <ignate...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> during process of getting tilde approved in Fedora Packaging
> Guidelines we realized that we need some special handling for
> separator (most probably) "+".
>
> Some examples (left is what expected, right is what current situation):
> 1.0+ > 1.0              | 1.0+ == 1.0
> 1.0+20160101git < 1.0.1 | 1.0+20160101git > 1.0.1
>
> During long discussion at #rpm.org on freenode with Florian and Panu:
>
> 1. Florian didn't like to change behavior of "+" as it's already
> allowed character and people might expect it to do something
> different.
> 2. From alternative symbols we needed to choose from: "@", "#", "^"
>
> After thinking more about problem I realized that we probably just
> change behavior of "+".

Yes, this is the right way to go, as we don't need more "specialness"
and it's relatively intuitive to indicate <ver>+<checkout> as the
checkout above it.

> Some questions are still in my mind:
> * vercmp: 1~ ? 1+

I'm not sure here. Normally, you use "1~" to indicate an all-inclusive
set (pre-release, release, and post-release), as opposed to "1" (which
would include only release and post-release).

Strictly speaking 1~ < 1+ in comparison, as the tilde operator pushes
it down and the plus operator would push it up.

> * How "+" should be handled in (Build)Requires?
>     * BuildRequires: foo == 1+ should match 1+, 1+git, 1+whatever ?

I'm not sure exactly how this should be handled... Probably 1+<whatever>?

>     * BuildRequires: foo >= 1 should match 1, 1.1, 1+git, 1.1+whatever ?

Yes.

>     * BuildRequires: foo < 1+ should match 1, 1~git, 0.whatever ?

Yes.

>
> Thoughts? Suggestions?
> --
> -Igor Gnatenko
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-ecosystem mailing list
> Rpm-ecosystem@lists.rpm.org
> http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-ecosystem



-- 
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
Rpm-ecosystem mailing list
Rpm-ecosystem@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-ecosystem

Reply via email to