Bug#17621: packaging-manual: about versions based on dates
I've just received a bug report about this discussion, wherein the
proposed text is as shown here:
> In general, Debian packages should use the same version numbers as the
> upstream sources.
>
> However, in some cases where the upstream version number is based on a
> date (i.e., a development `snapshot' release) dpkg cannot handle these
> version numbers currently, without epochs. For example, dpkg will
> consider `96May01' to be greater than `96Dec24'.
>
> 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'. It is up to the maintainer whether he/she wants to
> bother the upstream maintainer to change the version numbers upstream,
> too.
>
> Note, that other version formats based on dates which are parsed
> correctly by dpkg should _NOT_ be changed.
>
> Native Debian packages (i.e., packages which have been written
> especially for Debian) should always use the `YYYY-MM-DD' format.
I think that we should use this text with the following modifications:
1. Change `i.e.' to `e.g.' in para.2, line 2. (Typo/error.)
2. Change `96' to `1996' and delete `and starting with the year 2000'
in para.3. This will avoid silly questions about Y2K, and is clearer
and more consistent.
3. Add `whose version numbers include dates' before `should always' in
para.5, line 2. (Clarification that this is not intented to deprecate
packages with non-date version numbers.)
Ian.
Reply to: