Re: PW#5-15: Package versions based on dates
> schwarz@monet.m.isar.de (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 13.01.98 in <[🔎] 199801132234.XAA04260@klee.painters.schwarz-online.com>:
>
> > To prevent having to use epochs for every new upstream version,
> > the version number should be changed to the following format in
> > such cases: `96-05-01', `96-12-24', and starting with the year
> > 2000 `2000-12-24'.
>
> I'd say it should at least be optional to use 4 digit years instead.
I'd say that if the maintainer changes the upstream date anyway, a
4-digit year should be compulsory. (and at the very least optional!)
--
joost witteveen, joostje@debian.org
Potentially offensive files, part 5: /dev/random.
`head -c 4 /dev/random` may print 4-letter words (once every approx 4e8 tries).
Reply to: