Re: Version numbering

[Scott James Remnant]

On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 10:15, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:

> Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> > I didn't understand your proposal, but I hope you are not
> > planning to make 2.2 < 2.3a < 2.3.  That would be counter
> > intuitive.  IMHO any numbering scheme ought to work with `ls -v'.
> 
> Actually, that is what I'm proposing:  I've had to explain it many, many 
> times 
> over the years, and people just expect to see alpha/beta releases named after 
> the final release they are heading towards.
> 
> Your point about `ls -v' is a good one though.  I'll put an extra `-' before 
> the letter:
> 
Not sure whether it's a concern, but generally most packaging systems
(RPM springs to mind) do not allow a '-' in the package's upstream
version.

Scott
-- 
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part