On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Philip Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > (side comment: whatever we use, conceptually becomes "rev=" reborn. > but at least using ",xx" is much less ugly than > REV=xxxx,rev=yyy)
The main problem is all the variants that have existed over the years since the policy is not clear on this. Here's some examples from the current catalog not counting all ugly ones with "_rev=foo": autossh 1.4,REV=2009.06.25_b boincclient 6.7.4,REV=2009.02.05_r17141 mlterm 2.9.3,REV=2007.01.08_i386only mplayer 1.0.0,REV=2007.09.22.rc1try3 radiance 3.8,REV=2008.02.11,i386only squid 2.7,REV=2010.10.05_STABLE9 Let's take this opportunity to set this policy clearly and not be up to interpretation formatting wise. I would like to see some freedom for the content left of REV but the formatting of all parts should be strict. I like "1.2,p,REV=1234.56.78" much better than "1.2,REV=1234.56.78_rev=p", I agree with you there. A quick glance through the pkgutil code didn't reveal any negatives but I would like to set up some tests and get back to you on that. Looking at what's written now at http://www.opencsw.org/extend-it/contribute-packages/build-standards/#versioning, I think it should be allowed (but not to be used unless needed) for more numeric fields than YYYY.MM.DD since that makes it easy to make a package the same day that distinguishes itself from the other one by using, e.g., YYYY.MM.DD.HH.mm. Pkgutil processes any number of these fields until one package "wins". I don't know if you do but it's a suggestion. I also think we should make it clear that the version string is now in three parts where the middle one is optional, the content of it should be from a fixed list which from the start should contain "p" for patched. Something like this: 1.2.3[,x],REV=YYYY.MM.DD[.xx] What do you think? /peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
