[pacman-dev] vercmp discussion
allan at archlinux.org
Thu Jul 17 10:24:09 EDT 2008
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> You do realize you just broke openssh version numbering
>> Here is my vote for the best order:
>> 1.0alpha < 1.0beta < 1.0pre < 1.0rc < 1.0 < 1.0a < 1.0b < 1.0c
> I think I just restored the old behavior, what we had before is :
> 1.0a < 1.0alpha < 1.0b < 1.0beta < 1.0c < 1.0pre < 1.0rc < 1.0
> And as far as I can see, it never caused problems to openssh.
> Both old and new behaviors worked fine with it, because we always had :
> 4.3p1 < 4.3p2 < 4.4p1
> According to the cvs history :
> and the source archives :
> the scheme was always X.Y[.Z]pN .
Yeah, poor example... In the v1.2ish era they went 1.2 -> 12.p2 ->
1.2p3 but that was a while ago...
A better example is samba :)
> Now, maybe 1.0alpha < 1.0beta < 1.0pre < 1.0rc < 1.0 < 1.0a < 1.0b <
> 1.0c would be better, but we never had this behavior, and implementing
> would be (much?) more complex than what we have now.
I was really trying to point out that you can't satisfy everyone... But
maybe that order is quite good although it would be quite complex.
More information about the pacman-dev