[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Re: Speaking about debian-perl to conferences



On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:52:16 +0200, Gabor Szabo wrote:

> >  Do you think that perhaps the PAUSE server might have a gentle advisory that a version number
> >  in the form of major.minor (i.e. 1.0) might be useful for those downstream as well as useful
> >  for users to estimate the relative maturity of the code? Or is this one of those things that
> >  would be great if we could do it but we can never get everyone to do it?
> after seeing this message I asked on the module-authors list what
> people think about enforcing
> a stricter format of version numbering on some level. We'll have to
> see what is going to be the
> responses - if any.

That's great, thanks.
 
> >   (0.2200-3)      libdbd-csv-perl
>     Is actually 0.22 on CPAN, where is the additional 00 from?

Added by Debian; the problem is that the history as seen on
http://search.cpan.org/dist/DBD-CSV/ was
0.1030
0.2001
0.2002
0.21
0.22

For CPAN 0.21 is probably greater than 0.2002, for Debian 21 < 2002.
By adding the trailing zeros we get our math right again :)

> >   (0.2808.01-1)   libmodule-build-perl                      0.2808
>     Where was the additional 01 taken
>     from ? Was that the 0.2808_01 release?

Exactly, the underline is converted to a dot because underlines are
not allowed in Debian version numbers.
No big deal.

> >   (0.06.1b-5)     libpdf-create-perl 
> Currently 0.08 on CPAN

That's another funny case -- CPAN has different releases then
sourceforge for this same module :/
I guess we should track both ...
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/perl-pdf/)
 
> In any case there is already a CPANTS kwalitee metric for proper version number
> http://cpants.perl.org/kwalitee.html but all the mentioned modules
> passed the test.
> So maybe the has_proper_version on CPANTS should be stricter.

From a Debian point of view the versions are all fine -- as long they
stick to the same scheme for a given module; what's difficult for our
sorting algorithms are modules that change from x.yyyy to x.yy or
from m.nnnn to m.nn.nn or similar.

If you're interested in the details, the sorting algorithm is
explained at
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Version

Cheers,
gregor
 
-- 
 .''`.   http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4
 : :' :  debian: the universal operating system - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/
   `-    NP: Cat Stevens: Father And Son

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: