Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thursday 12 April 2007 17:38:58 Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >> The date must still be in there. Some packages have used a format >> like 20070412svn1234, which is acceptable although not strictly listed >> in the naming guidelines as one of the possibilities. (Which is >> something that probably should be in the guidelines.) > > Well, since we have a 0.X.<snapshot> scheme, and X is always increasing, does > it really matter if a date is in there, or that the numbers past X even > increment the right way? > > 0.1.1234svn > 0.2.1233svn > 0.3.1334svn > > Wouldn't those work? imo, yes. As you(Jessie) pointed out, as long as the X in 0.X increments, I don't really care what comes after it (within reason and sanity, of course). Unless there's some other reason for insisting on including the date, but I can't think of one atm. -- Rex -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
