Hi Mattia,
On 2022-02-27 19:21, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:53:26AM +0200, Andrius Merkys wrote:
>> The naming scheme could be adjusted to add '.' before the letter in
>> version string (2.40c -> 2.40.c), but I cannot craft a watch file which
>> could perform this.
>
> I'm
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:53:26AM +0200, Andrius Merkys wrote:
> dpkg-genchanges: warning: the current version (2.40c+ds-1) is earlier
> than the previous one (2.40+ds-1)
mh, yeah, that one's annoying.
> The naming scheme could be adjusted to add '.' before the letter in
> version string (2.40c
Dear Mentors,
I am maintaining package c2x, which has the following versioning scheme:
2.40c >> 2.40b >> 2.40
This is correct order as per 'dpkg --compare-versions'. However, if I
add '+ds' repack suffix (I need to), the order becomes reversed. Thus
'uscan' behaves as expected because it knows
On 24/04/14 03:49, Christian Kastner wrote:
On 2014-04-24 12:45, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote:
On 24.04.14 20:12:12, Benjamin Donald-Wilson wrote:
Hello,
I'm wishing to package ipad-charge[0] for Debian.[1] The only problem I
appear to be having is that the upstream don't version their
On 2014-04-29 00:22, Octavio Alvarez wrote:
Wouldn't this version scheme open the possibility an incorrect timeline?
For example, commit 20140428.1234567 would be considered previous than
20140428.2345678 when this may not necessarily be the case in the git
history.
While theoretically
Hello,
I'm wishing to package ipad-charge[0] for Debian.[1] The only problem I
appear to be having is that the upstream don't version their uploads. I've
emailed the developer a few days ago but haven't received a response so far.
I'm wondering what I should version it as if I do not receive a
On 24.04.14 20:12:12, Benjamin Donald-Wilson wrote:
Hello,
I'm wishing to package ipad-charge[0] for Debian.[1] The only problem I
appear to be having is that the upstream don't version their uploads. I've
emailed the developer a few days ago but haven't received a response so far.
I'm
On 2014-04-24 12:45, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote:
On 24.04.14 20:12:12, Benjamin Donald-Wilson wrote:
Hello,
I'm wishing to package ipad-charge[0] for Debian.[1] The only problem I
appear to be having is that the upstream don't version their uploads. I've
emailed the developer a few days ago
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Christian Kastner deb...@kvr.at wrote:
On 2014-04-24 12:45, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote:
On 24.04.14 20:12:12, Benjamin Donald-Wilson wrote:
Hello,
I'm wishing to package ipad-charge[0] for Debian.[1] The only problem I
appear to be having is that the
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Christian Kastner deb...@kvr.at wrote:
If that doesn't work, another possibility would be to create a mock
version number based on the date, for example MMDD.{7-digit-commit-ID}.
...and possibly prepending it with 0~ in order to avoid you to
introduce an
On Apr 24, 2014 1:00 PM, Benjamin Donald-Wilson be...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Christian Kastner deb...@kvr.at wrote:
If that doesn't work, another possibility would be to create a mock
version number based on the date, for example
MMDD.{7-digit-commit-ID}.
So
Thanks for the advice. Just one more quick question, should I use date of
the commit I'm using or the date that I package it? (last commit was
roughly 5 months ago)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Mattia Rizzolo mapr...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On Apr 24, 2014 1:00 PM, Benjamin Donald-Wilson
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:14:08PM +1000, Benjamin Donald-Wilson wrote:
Thanks for the advice. Just one more quick question, should I use date of
the commit I'm using or the date that I package it? (last commit was
roughly 5 months ago)
Their commit date. The reason is there is at
Hi,
I'm updating some code from an upstream source, so do I give this
version a different version number?
For example, if it's 0.3.1, should I call it 0.3.1.1 or use a different
format?
Cheers,
Ben
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
also sprach Ben Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.02.26.1746 +0100]:
I'm updating some code from an upstream source, so do I give this
version a different version number?
Use the Debian revision and send patches upstream.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`.
Hello Ben,
* Ben Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-02-26 17:48]:
I'm updating some code from an upstream source, so do I give this
version a different version number?
For example, if it's 0.3.1, should I call it 0.3.1.1 or use a different
format?
No. In my opinion it is the best thing to just
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 17:55 +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
Hello Ben,
* Ben Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-02-26 17:48]:
I'm updating some code from an upstream source, so do I give this
version a different version number?
For example, if it's 0.3.1, should I call it 0.3.1.1 or use a
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 05:11:54PM +, Ben Hill wrote:
I'm updating some code from an upstream source, so do I give this
version a different version number?
For example, if it's 0.3.1, should I call it 0.3.1.1 or use a different
format?
No. In my opinion it is the best
18 matches
Mail list logo
