On Sat 9. of July 2005 10:10, Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki wrote: > Dnia 08-07-2005, pią o godzinie 23:02 +0200, Tomasz Wittner napisał(a): > > On Fri 8. of July 2005 18:34, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > > > On Friday 08 July 2005 19:17, twittner wrote: > > > > +Version: 2005.07.08 > > > > +Release: 0.1 > > > > +License: BSD > > > uh! such versioning just begs for epoch bump afterwards! > > > > > I can't imagine such situation (but I'm not brilliant ;) - version is taken > > from date '+%Y.%m.%d' . Please, provide an example when bumping epoch is > > necessary - show me output from: > > > > rpmvercmp YYYY.MM.DD-relX yyyy.mm.dd-relY > > We use versioning as follows: > > (1.)0.20050708-0.1 > > Then reverting to another snapshot or changing the versioning scheme > allows for smooth upgrades within the same epoch. I really don't know what's it all about: $ rpmvercmp 2005.07.08-1 2005.07.09-0.1 2005.07.08-1 < 2005.07.09-0.1 It works as expected without bumping epoch. > For example if author > decides to give the next release a number of 2.0 instead of a date. > I'm author of FreeBSD makewhatis Linux port and I don't plan to change versioning schema because it is my versioning schema, which is convient to me. I've taken makewhatis's sources from FreeBSD cvs (makewhatis.*, queue.h, stringlist.* and each exists only with its cvs revision), adapted and slightly refined (help printing, ac/am). I hope that everything was explained.
-- Tomasz Wittner _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en