Re: limits for package name and version (MBF alert: ... .deb filenames)
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 07:31:22PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> Why assume the first version will be >= 1.x? It's not uncommon to use
> 0.x. Using 0~YYMMDD seems a safer option to reduce the chance of
> needing an epoch if/when upstream starts using actual version numbers.
~ sorts after ., so "0~110427" will be considered newer than "0.1". Therefore,
the 0 in 0~YYMMDD is meaningless, and would be no better than ~YYMMDD (which
would still sort after 0.1, and require an epoch).