Bug#186102: version numbering for date-releases is flawed
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 04:46:40PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
>
> Hi,
>
> The Policy section "Version numbers based on dates" recommends using simply
> YYYYMMDD for versions based on dates.
I have always read this policy as documenting how to write date as part
of version, not how to use (only) date as version.
> However, it is not uncommon for upstream authors to release date-based
> versions for betas, and then later switch to e.g. 1.0 for "proper" releases.
> In such cases, people who used YYYYMMDD need to use epochs to switch to X.Y.
>
> This would be fixed by recommending to prepending additional zeros to
> YYYYMMDD. I would probably go for 0.0.YYYYMMDD. Someone else might
> want more?
It can be a useful tip to add in the policy, unless we decide that epoch
are not so evil. Notifying upstream of the problem should be advised
also. Probably upstream is able to understnad that releasing 20030201
before 1 can be confusing. Also upstream can tell you how many '0.' you
need.
One alternative is to use 0+YYYYMMDD as version, that sorts before 0.0
This looks more like a best practice than a policy, though.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
How evil epochs are ?
Reply to: