> For those who missed it > > Masatake, this is another way to solve your naming problems.
Thank you. > arch--ive/c--b : fully qualified package > arch--ive/c--b--v : fully qualified version > arch--ive/c--b--v--r : fully qualified revision Our prbolem is that the term for `arch--ive/c--b--v--r' is too long in spite of using `arch--ive/c--b--v--r' frequently in symbols in xtla. > 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 My proposal *in XTLA code* is: c : category b : branch v : version r : revision arch--ive : archive, archive name c : category name semi qualified c--b : branch name semi qualified c--b--v : version name semi qualified c--b--v--r : revision name semi qualified arch--ive/c--b : branch name arch--ive/c--b--v : version name arch--ive/c--b--v--r : revision name ...not good. BTW, `package' is really new term for me about Arch.
