Peter Lewis wrote: > On Thursday 02 December 2010 16:13:56 Cédric Girard wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Xyne <[email protected]> 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
