For those who missed it
Masatake, this is another way to solve your naming problems.
----- Forwarded message from James Blackwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 10:15:10 -0400
From: James Blackwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: James Blackwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] The C-B-V-R part of a fully qualified name
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> One of the xtla developers was asking in #arch about what the best
> name for the category--branch--version--revision part of a fully
> qualified name (archive/c-b-v-r). I recommended "fully qualified
> revision" or "non-fully qualified name", but I thought I'd ping the
> mailing list.
Last year I asked Tom on the list to label everything. He came through.
I don't remember exactly what he said, but I've been using the following
naming conventions without any apparent confusion when talking to others:
c : category
b : branch component
v : version component
r : revision component
arch--ive : archive
c : category
c--b : package
c--b--v : version
c--b--v--r : revision
arch--ive/c--b : fully qualified package
arch--ive/c--b--v : fully qualified version
arch--ive/c--b--v--r : fully qualified revision
Regards,
James
--
James Blackwell Try something fun: For the next 24 hours, give
Smile more! each person you meet a compliment!
GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D 247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400
_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Matthieu
-------------------------------------------------
envoyé via Webmail/IMAG !
