On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 13:40 +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 12:57 +0200, Matthias Saou wrote: > > So 1.1.fc3 < 1.fc4? I've been bitten too many times to be able to swear > > that's correct without checking it first ;-) Also, since no "1.fc3" > > package had been built, it doesn't make that much sense to bump the > > release for the build. I personally prefer the suggestion above of > > overwriting the tag, as long as it's used with extreme caution... > > 1.1.fc3 > 1.fc4 because numeric parts are considered > than alphabetic. Yes, but I said "appending". 1.fc3.1 < 1.fc4.
