Re: Bug#1035946: RFS: justbuild/1.1.0-1 [ITP] -- Justbuild generic build system
Hi Wookey
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 8:19 PM Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> wrote:
> I used 0~0-1 to start with. 0~<DATE> is a quite a good way of
> versioning things like this that don't have versions. (that 0~ lets
> you switch neatly to real versions in the future should they
> appear). Adding git hashes mostly makes for unreadable versions and
> doesn't add much IMHO, but we can do that if it's important.
Yes, the git hash clutters up the version, but at least you can easily
identify which exact commit is packaged. The date alone might not be
sufficient, in particular with rebasing.
> Debian generally tries to pick a version and make depending packages
> work with it, rather than try to suport multiple versions unless it
> really is necessary. I do not have a good feel for what the best
> approach here is, and would greatly appreciate input from someone more
> familiar with the codebase on what the best approach in debian might be.
I see. I just wonder how useful such a package is. Many packages might
have a hard time using it without significant upstream changes. Just
as an example, even gRPC (another Google project itself) uses a 2 year
old version, which is incompatible with what Fedora packaged last
year, which is already incompatible with current master. It's kind of
a mess...
> I will put my unfinished project on salsa, file an ITP, and find my
> notes, then mail you and we can see if we can sort this with a
> reasonable level of effort.
Sure, I would be very happy to help.
Oliver
Reply to: