> The "8.5.pl3-1" would have been a very standard way of solving this,
> and the suggested more plain "8.5.3-1" is fine as well.
Right, I somehow didn't think of "8.5.pl3-1", that is much better :)
I still don't really like "8.5.3-1" though, it's closer to being
confusingly different from what
On Tue Nov 22 08:07:20 UTC 2016 Bennett Piater bennett at piater.name wrote:
> On 11/22/2016 08:58 AM, brent timothy saner via aur-general wrote:
> > what i'd recommend is instead use 8.5 -> 8.5.1 -> 8.5.2
> >
> > and then have a _pkgver= variable with the actual string, if it's needed
> > later
I'm not usually saving mails from here. After a thread is finished, I delete It.
But this will be useful for the future if someday I have to maintain a package
with such an ugly versioning scheme like this.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 11:28:40AM +, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
> Em novembro 22, 2016 6:35 Baptiste Jonglez escreveu:
> >Interesting, thanks. However, upstream starts each new minor version at
> >p1, so it looks like:
> >
> >7.2p1 → 7.2p2 → 7.3p1 → etc
> >
>
> Worth nothing that
Em novembro 22, 2016 6:35 Baptiste Jonglez escreveu:
Interesting, thanks. However, upstream starts each new minor version at
p1, so it looks like:
7.2p1 → 7.2p2 → 7.3p1 → etc
Worth nothing that OpenSSH releases the so called "portable" versions. Hence
the 'p'.
which works fine for
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 17 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 1 fully signed off package
* 37 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Baptiste Jonglez <
bapti...@bitsofnetworks.org> wrote:
> What is the best solution to deal with this? I think I can either map the
> scheme to a more reasonable one (e.g. "8.5.pl3" instead of "8.5pl3"), or
> bump the epoch when needed.
>
I would go with the
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 03:12:58AM -0500, brent timothy saner via aur-general
wrote:
> It's worth noting openssh uses the same versioning naming (though i
> don't see what's so hard to mentally replace the last minor with a p in
> front).
>
> Here's the PKGBUILD:
>
>
On 11/22/2016 03:07 AM, Bennett Piater wrote:
>
>
> On 11/22/2016 08:58 AM, brent timothy saner via aur-general wrote:
>> what i'd recommend is instead use 8.5 -> 8.5.1 -> 8.5.2
>>
>> and then have a _pkgver= variable with the actual string, if it's needed
>> later in the build. i.e.:
>
> I
On 11/22/2016 08:58 AM, brent timothy saner via aur-general wrote:
> what i'd recommend is instead use 8.5 -> 8.5.1 -> 8.5.2
>
> and then have a _pkgver= variable with the actual string, if it's needed
> later in the build. i.e.:
I don't like this because it prevents users from seeing which
10 matches
Mail list logo
