3 Dec
2010
3 Dec
'10
12:27 a.m.
On Thu 02 Dec 2010 10:39 -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote:
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Ray Rashif <schiv@archlinux.org> wrote:
My original view had been that a package would be simply called 'package' regardless of whether or not a source tarball was offered. Then if someone makes a version that builds against upstream VCS, that package would be called package-vcs.
In light of this new discussion however, I feel like the proper policy is to name a package without a suffix if there is a 'versioned release', no matter where this comes from (source tarball, vcs tag, etc.). Then the converse is that if a package has *no release* but just a rolling development trunk, then it is given a suffix.
I agree, but shouldn't this topic be in a separate thread?