Hi,
I took a quick look at it last night and I see only one sticking point:
there's no version number anywhere. So now I understand that Neil
really means it when he says they only do snapshots.
Neil, I have to put some sort of monotonically increasing version number
on this package.
That's fine, and is something we are aware needs doing. I'll mention
this to our build guy (cc'd on this message, Andrew) and see what we
can come up with.
We don't simply make nightly builds, but we have a buildbot machine
that keeps churning out snapshots every time a change is made to the
code. But I'm sure we can shove a counter some where that keeps
incrementing. I have no preference, but Andrew might, so that the
Windows snapshots can share the same versioning information.
Thanks
Neil
Quite a few packages use a date as a version number,
in varying formats, but always such that the result sorts nicely, of
course. We should probably agree on something you like, because
undoubtedly people will start referencing the version number when
sending you bugs.
If dates are okay, then you could use either 2006.10.12 or 20061012. If
you want to reserve the possibility of switching over to the 1.0, 2.0,
... style, we could pick 0.0.20061012.
Let me know if you have any preference. I expect I'll take a shot at
packaging this tomorrow.
Cliff
_______________________________________________
debian-haskell mailing list
[email protected]
http://urchin.earth.li/mailman/listinfo/debian-haskell
