Peter Lewis wrote:
On Thursday 02 December 2010 16:13:56 Cédric Girard wrote:
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Packages that are built from vcs but which are based on some form of upstream "release" should not include the tag in the package name.
I think the simplest rule of thumb would be that if the same PKGBUILD generates different binary packages depending on when makepkg was run, then it should include the suffix in the name.
These two rules are not the same. For instance the package xbmc-svn [1] is based on fixed svn version that does not corresponds to any "release" upstream. It is just tested svn revisions (by the packager) as not every revisions are usable.
My view would be that if a package builds a semi-stable but unreleased version (from wherever) which has been selected by the packager or upstream, then the package should be suffixed by -dev, -prerelease -unstable or something similar.
For the removal of confusion, -git -svn etc. should *track* the VCS in my view.
Pete.
For clarity, the only tag that I referred to in my previous post was the "vcs" tag. I agree with your comments regarding other suffixes. I think my proposed rule-of-thumb still works because the PKGBUILD for semi-stable releases still generates a fixed binary package. /Xyne