Re: Extending version numbering (Was: glibc_2.0.7pre1-3)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sat, 7 Mar 1998, Yann Dirson wrote:
> But I do agree it would be nice to have a special syntax for version
> numbers allowing to cope with {pre,alpha,beta}-like numbering. It is
> perfectly sane to distinguish between "it's in testing stage" and
> "it's released software", and we should IMHO support such a thing.
>
> Anyone against that ?
Yes, me.
Current glibc_2.0.7pre1-3 should have been packaged for experimental,
since it is not released software.
Something like "2.0.6.3" or "2.0.6.pre2.0.7-3" would have been a better
name (I use procmail_3.10.7 for procmail-3.11pre7).
Once we already have 2.0.7pre1-3, I would not mind at all having to
install final 2.0.7 by hand, without ugly epochs or "rel" things.
We should remember that most people have *not* upgraded to hamm yet.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1
iQCVAgUBNQEulyqK7IlOjMLFAQHFtAP/XDBv+SY+s+BJ/6TJggAVtsO5dJ8pEmBe
IBMQtukSiVQuEQBN3jof/fjm+eU21lDJpVJdYmTBHXmxuha7Lrsx393NkOqtccc4
zWrEGXZM2UA0oTNSHyW47N6qpxE2RI5YLehCyWVDIPsD732P3w5bLFxP1C6dRKOo
EEG49Vk1dUk=
=y+m3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: