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

Re: Bug#17621: [PROPOSED]: About versions based on dates

>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:

 Joey> I prefer to take a "don't fix it until it breaks" approach.

	You r approach below, with all due respect, is already broken
 as a policy proposal. We need to be general, and consistent, with the
 numbering scheme when we talk about making policy.

 Joey> For example, my package, lambdacore, has had the following
 Joey> upstream releases:
 Joey> 1oct94
 Joey> 02feb97

 Joey> Now though this is obviously not a numbering scheme dpkg can
 Joey> handle, as luck would have it, these version numbers have
 Joey> compared correctly under dpkg so far.

	Just because one package has been lucky so far is not grouds
 for not changing a broken scheme.

 Joey> If a new version comes out in 2 days, of course, it will not
 Joey> version compare correctly, and so I'll then have to go to a
 Joey> sane version numbering scheme.  But why impose one before I
 Joey> really need to?

	Consistency. Setting a sane naming scheme as policy shall also
 prevent unnecesary epochs (since just looking at the file names shall
 no longer give a clue about prdering once epochs are in place). I
 think that using the sane approach in the forst place saves a lot of


 Woman was taken out of man -- not out of his head, to rule over him;
 nor out of his feet, to be trampled under by him; but out of his
 side, to be equal to him -- under his arm, that he might protect her,
 and near his heart that he might love her. Henry
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E

Reply to: