Re: LSB-FHS2.2beta3 update

[Christopher Yeoh <cyeoh@samba.org>]

Johannes Poehlmann writes:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:23:34AM +0100, Andrew Josey wrote:
> > All
> > Another update is now available,
> > at ftp://ftp.xopen.org/pub/lsb/test_suites/beta/
> > 
> Andrew, may i ask you a favour?
> 
> It would be desireable, if every single version 
> of a package has a immutable URL.
> To accomplish this, there may not be in place changes 
> of a file. File names are versioned instead. 
> 
> The most straightforward way would be to supply a tar.gz archive 
> of the beta directory and version the archive names
> like "lsb_testsuite-beta4.tar.gz". 
> 
> This guarantees that people take the correct combination 
> of test suite framework, etc. And it makes package building 
> more easy.

On the topic of versioning of filenames, thinking forward a bit I
think we'll be interested in two distinct types of versions:

- Version of the specification against which the test suite is 
  designed/tuned
- Version of the test suite itself as it changes

So to avoid confusion in the future I think we should be creating a
version number for each test suite based on these two versions.

I propose we start numbering the test suites with something like the
following scheme:

lsb-<test_suite_name>-A.B.X.Y.tar.gz

(with a betaNum after the Y if necessary for prereleases) where

  A.B refers to the specification version (currently it has been
  released as 1.0.0 but I'm assuming that the last digit is only used to
  signify editorial alterations?)

  X refers to the major version of the test framework (ie the
    tet/vsxgen tarball) needed to install/run the test suite. For
    test suites which don't need the framework just use 0 here.

  Y refers to the version of the test suite itself

Any objections/suggestions?

Regards,

Chris.
-- 
yeohc@au1.ibm.com
IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group
Canberra, Australia