Toshio, Thanks. I've done as you suggested, but I found out that in the README, it's actually versioned as 1.3 (not sure what those people are smoking). I've updated my review request and took it to the games sig. left the stuff online on: http://nmarques.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-enet/ Maybe if you get bored you can help ;) NM 2012/5/14 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 08:00:22PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote: >> Thanks, looks cool to me, I'll use that if there are no objections :) >> >> 2012/5/14 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx>: >> > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Nelson Marques <nmo.marques@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> One of the packages I'm submitting for Unknown Horizons support >> >> (python-enet or pyenet) has no real version and it's just svn revision >> >> 24 (python bindings for ENet); >> >> What would be the best way to express this in the spec file? >> >> >> >> ex: Version: 0.0.0+svn24 >> >> >> >> Or any other? Opinions most welcome. >> > >> > One "0" is enough, no need to assume minor and patch versions. Also, I >> > think + is a Debian thing, for Fedora it would just be part of the >> > release. For a pre-release package.: >> > >> > Version: 0 >> > Release: 0.1.svn24%{?dist} >> > >> > or something like that, would give: >> > >> > <package name>-0-0.1.svn24.<dist> >> > >> > see: >> > >> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages >> > > Yep -- we'd want the date in there too like this: > > Version: 0 > Release: 0.1.20120412svn24%{?dist} > > -Toshio > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- Nelson Marques // I've stopped trying to understand sandwiches with a third piece of bread in the middle... -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
