Re: Bad version number based on date advice in policy?
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 09:49:38PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> : 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.
> :
> : Native Debian packages (i.e., packages which have been written
> : especially for Debian) whose version numbers include dates should
> : always use the "YYYYMMDD" format.
>
> I would suggest using 0.YYYYMMDD to avoid using epoch when upstream
> finally decides to use version 1.0 instead.
This is bug #186102.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: