On 01/02/2022 21:14, Robert Riebisch via Svardos-users wrote:
Okay. But sorry, my "why" question wasn't exact: I was wondering, why
for the new package release the ".mrlg" has been ripped off. I coincidence?
Ah, this. I dropped the "mrlg" string because I couldn't find it in the
binary, so users might wonder if the package version matches the binary...
So, this (+svardos+ISO date) is now the official way?
I would propose a few slight changes to make things simpler:
- drop the "+svardos" part
- replace ISO date by a single number (the "SvarDOS package revision")
- The SvarDOS pkg rev restarts whenever the upstream version changes
- The SvarDOS pkg rev of 0 is hidden
All this actually mimics what Debian does*. So for example we could have:
FDISK 1.54 <- first package version
FDISK 1.54+1 <- package has been changed, but not the upstream version
FDISK 1.55 <- upstream version increased, so SvarDOS rev restarts
Does it sounds right? The idea here is not to clutter the version
strings too much, and only fiddle with them when a package is actually
changed.
By the way: Nice to see progress on SvarCOM. :-)
Yeah, was stuck for a week or so on a problem that I wasn't sure how to
solve in an elegant way (cleanup of temporary files used for pipes). Got
it working today.
Latest version also comes with links support, but you will definitely
NOT like it. ;-)
Mateusz
*) http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#version
_______________________________________________
Svardos-users mailing list
Svardos-users@lists.osdn.me
https://lists.osdn.me/mailman/listinfo/svardos-users
