Re: [PATCH] Specify policy for use of revision IDs in version numbers

[Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr>]

On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:00:14PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> So the reason for imposing a length restriction on version numbers in
> particular is due to the UI display of aptitude?  I'm a bit dubious that
> this is a good justification for a Policy rule.  dpkg -l has truncated
> version numbers for forever at 14 characters, and I don't recall this
> being a major issue in the past.  The thing that started off this thread,
> I thought, was the constraint on file name length in ISO images, which is
> the total length and doesn't impose a constraint specifically on the
> version.

Also there are no technical requirement for packages filenames in ISO images to be
canonical packages names. Packages filename can be mangled to fit the medium, there
is a program 'dpkg-name' to recover the canonical packages name. This requires
the same mangling to be applied to the filenames in the Packages files, but this 
not an issue since the Packages file is in the same medium.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.