On måndagen den 28 januari 2008, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > On 28/01/2008, Andreas Tille wrote: > > ... which describes the _content_ of the tarball, but not the _name_ > > (or extension) of the tarball. So there is no clarification whether > > to use 'dfsg', 'debian', 'ds' or something else in the tarball name to > > my knowlwedge. > > How are “dfsg”, “debian”, or “ds” extensions? It's in the very middle of > the tarball name, and the extension would rather be “((orig.)tar.)gz” > (there's the revision in the way, also). > > It'd be clearer to talk about the string to include in version numbers, > and I agree that having a common pattern in the policy or the devref > would make sense. There are several combinations of the above, mixed > together with the use of ‘+’, ‘~’ and ‘.’, and getting a standard for > that couldn't hurt. Whatever the suffix, what do you say about always using '-' as the separator? Remember that hyphens are allowed in upstream versions. Since hyphens are generally used to separate upstream from downstream, it would more clearly indicate that the -dfsg* suffix is not really part of upstream's version number. -- Magnus Holmgren firstname.lastname@example.org (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks) "Exim is better at being younger, whereas sendmail is better for Scrabble (50 point bonus for clearing your rack)" -- Dave Evans
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.