On 7/20/12 2:04 PM, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 07:21:02AM -0700, Tom Eastep wrote:
>> An alternative would be for me to change my release numbering system 
>> from a.b.c[.d] to a.b.c-d, but I suspect that move would cause 
>> disruption to all of the distro maintainers (and some amount of work for 
>> me).
>>
> I don't think this would help at all.  It would simply result in the
> Debian packages being versioned as a.b.c-d-n (which while technically
> being a valid Debian version number, just looks funny to me).

My hope would be that the distributions would package my a.b.c-d as
a.b.c-d. What is the point of adding "-n" by my version if 'n' is always 1.

-Tom
-- 
Tom Eastep        \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who
Shoreline,         \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like
Washington, USA     \ all of the passengers in his car
http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to