On Sat 29 Mar 2008 at 05:06PM, Stephen Hahn wrote:
> * Dan Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-29 20:33]:
> > Why do we version a lot of our packages as 0.5.11-0.<build-number>?
> >
> > Wouldn't it be a lot cleaner to do:
> >
> > 5.11-79?
> >
> > I've been playing with new output formats for pkg status (well, now
> > pkg list) and at least in one of my proposals, this really stands out as
> > a wart.
>
> The 0. leading the version component is to keep our packages out of the
> way of real versions while we're fleshing out the per-package
> metadata. For instance, those components with real version numbers
> need to be corrected to use those values, rather than a version
> derived from the OS bundle. Once that cleanup is done, I would expect
> us to move the remaining packages to something like 5.11.
>
> The -0. leading the branch component signifies the initial development
> branch. After we release a supported -1., then the development branch
> (which is newer than -1.) would become -1.<build>. If we were to not
> group the branch revisions in this way, you'd see support tails going
> directly off the build number (like -79.1), which I think is less
> helpful for the site that's following only supported releases than -1,
> -2, etc.
>
> So you'll get half, eventually.
That works for me; thanks for clarifying.
-dp
--
Daniel Price - Solaris Kernel Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - blogs.sun.com/dp
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
