On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 4:47 PM, C. Scott Ananian <csc...@laptop.org> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Gonzalo Odiard <gonz...@laptop.org> wrote: >> Then I plan to ignore the customization when I compute the order. > > So why is it there?
To allow identification. But what Gonzalo pointed out is that in the case of 1.1-peru vs 1.1-argentina, vs 1.1, it makes sense to match them as equal. They shouldn't trigger an upgrade from one to the other. I had a long chat with Gonzalo on the topic of versioning. Initially, I advocated strongly for something with the expresiveness of dpkg's versioning. However, that's wrong. We need to use a clear _subset_ of what dpkg, rpm, portage(... etc) can do, so the distro packager retains its flexibility (see: epoch). It is true, dpkg considers 1.1-peru to be an upgrade over 1.1-argentina, due to alpha ordering. But that has no useful meaning. > Either solve the problem correctly, or solve it as simply as possible. This solves it as simply as possible. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel