Re: Date versions: (Was: Humble comments...)

[Andrius Merkys <merkys@debian.org>]

Hi Kingsley,

On 2023-06-25 00:48, Kingsley G. Morse Jr. wrote:
> You politely proposed using download date as
> version for CCD.
>
> You're smart.
>
> Maybe you already know this, but Debian's Policy
> Manual has a sub-sub-section called
>
>      "3.2.1. Version numbers based on dates"
>
> If you haven't checked it out yet, maybe it would
> be
>
>      interesting, or even
>
>      helpful.
>
> It's at
>
>      3.2.1. Version numbers based on dates
>      https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#version-numbers-based-on-dates

Thanks for the link. I had not read this portion before, but I believe I 
have been adhering to its spirit. I would use the same versioning scheme 
for CCD.

> PS: I agree my ginormous spread sheet summarizing
>      life span experiments may interest Debian's
>      Med team.
>
>      Through no fault of yours, I failed to explain
>      the reason why I asked if the PDB Chemical
>      Component Dictionary might compliment it.
>
>      I wondered if data in the CCD might add value
>      to it for synergistic technical and biological
>      reasons.
>
>      My ginormous spread sheet summarizing life
>      span experiments is currently a for-profit
>      project.
>
>      But, I'd love to find a crowd funding guru who
>      could show me how to
>
>          get paid and
>
>          publish it under a permissive license, like
>          the PDB Chemical Component Dictionary, so it
>          could
>
>              be part of Debian and
>
>              expedite research to
>
>                  slow, and maybe even
>
>                  reverse
>
>              the scourge of aging.

I see. I believe such discussion is worth a thread of its own.

Best wishes,
Andrius