Why not simply telling "minor release update" whenever the version upgrade is in the epoch part only?
Luca Donaggio On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:15 PM, David Greaves <da...@dgreaves.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 13:20 +0000, Andrew Flegg wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 12:55, Graham Cobb > > <g+...@cobb.uk.net<g%2b...@cobb.uk.net>> > wrote: > > > On Friday 30 October 2009 11:44:17 Juha Kallioinen wrote: > > >> And a perfectly good one too! :) It's useful not to change the > upstream > > >> package version too much so that it's easier to see that a package > could > > >> use updating. > > > > > > I agree with all Juha's points (but I would, wouldn't I!). > > > > Simplest solution I can see, whilst still giving the user some > > indication of version number (3.4.1 tells you something over 0.0.1): > > the Application Manager only shows things of the form (\d+)(\.\d+)*? > > > > So, the example of 2.0.0+cvs20040908+mp4v2+bmp-0ubuntu6maemo1 would > > just appear as 2.0.0 in the view. > > /me would be confused. > > Why is it upgrading 2.0.0 to 2.0.0 *again* ? > > David > (Who presumably wouldn't see the -local_bugfix1 and -local_bugfix2 > suffixes) > > > _______________________________________________ > maemo-developers mailing list > maemo-developers@maemo.org > https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers >
_______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
