[aur-general] Revise VCS packages versioning

Uwe Koloska kolewu at koloro.de
Thu Oct 31 16:17:41 EDT 2013


Am 31.10.2013 16:09, schrieb Jerome Leclanche:
> The main issue with -git versioning is the inconsistency.

I don't think so.  I think the main issue with git versioning (regarding
package versions) is its non monotonic trait.

> I'm not suggesting we drop the pkgver function (nobody is). I'm saying
> we need a standardized pkgver script that outputs consistent,
> compatible results between tagged and non-tagged git repos, and
> recommend that as the proto.

IMHO what's really missing, are requirements, that describe what the
version number has to be like *and* for what purpose!  With this
requirements the developer is able to craft a pkgver function that is
suited for the used repository.  And sure, every developer will be happy
about some useful patterns like "if the repository has no tags, use '0'
instead of a tag part".

AFAIS there are the following requirements for version numbering:
* the version number must be monotone with respect to
** newer commits
** newer package number
* the version shall be "short"

If there are other requirements (like "must follow semantic versioning
scheme" or "must combine package and upstream version (how?)"), they
should be stated clearly and with a reason.

Just my 2 cents.

Thank you for listening

More information about the aur-general mailing list