Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots

[Eric Bavier]

On 2016-01-21 15:25, address@hidden wrote:
> Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> skribis:
>
> > Ben Woodcroft <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > On 12/01/16 19:26, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > So, a Git snapshot’s version number could be:
> > > >
> > > >    2.0.11-3.deadbeef
> > > >      ^    ^    ^
> > > >      |    |    `— upstream commit ID
> > > >      |    |
> > > >      |    `—— 3rd Guix package revision
> > > >      |
> > > >    latest upstream version
> > > >
> > > > The next snapshot would be:
> > > >
> > > >    2.0.11-4.cafeefac
> > > >
> > > > WDYT?
> > > I can't see anything wrong with this myself. Is this accepted policy 
> > > now?
> >
> > I think this is a good policy to follow.  So far we didn’t always use
> > “-” to separate the upstream version from the revision + commit ID (or
> > did only I do this wrong?).  Some packages use “.”, which is what
> > prompted me to ask for clarification.
>
> If there are no objections, I’ll commit the attached patch, which will
> make it Official Policy.
>
> Thoughts?

My only issue with the attached patch is that the commit identifier in 
the example is not 7 digits (characters?) as recommended.

--
`~Eric