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

[Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>      However, in some cases where the upstream version number is based on a
>      date (e.g., 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: `19960501', `19961224'. 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. 

On re-reading this, I have no problem with the proposal. Lambdacore's
version numbers, strange as they are, are currently "dates which are parsed
correctly by dpkg" (though this occurs completly by chance; dpkg happens to
order them correctly), so lambdcore or other packages with similar versions
do not need to be changed unless a new upstream version breaks that. This
seems in-line with what the proposed amendment is saying, though I wish it
said it more explictly.

-- 
see shy jo