On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 06:11:54PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'd worry slightly, though, that there are other schemes where that > > behaves poorly. Should we optimize for git's version numbering, or for > > what most other projects want? There could even be room for two types of > > version-compare. But before thinking about that, I'd want to know why > > glibc behaves as it does. > > We don't have to force one version style for all projects. We could > provide --sort="thisver:refname" vs. "thatver:refname", or put the > "-pre" part in config file. The important thing is we can control the > version algorithm. Right, exactly. It may make sense to just do it the way _we_ think is sensible for now, then, and we can add a glibc-compatible one later if somebody actually wants it. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html