Hi,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > So please change the above cited policy section in a way that it is
> > clear that the "YYYY.MM.DD" format is preferred and the format without
>
> Do you have statistics on the current patterns used in the archive?
>From the feeling yes: Far too many with 8-digit dates. That's why I
wrote that bug report to get things in the right direction.
> 1. I personally feel it is horrible beyond belief, i.e. this is highly
> subjective matter with little technical reasons to mandate in one
> way or the other.
See my answer to Russ for a technical (well biological) reason.
> 2. -policy documents best current *ADOPTED* practice.
That's new to me. For me, Policy is how it _should_ or _must_ be, by
steering things in the right directions. If -policy would _only_
document _adopted_ practices, that would be bad IMHO. (Sure, if policy
lags behind as with the DM-Upload-Allowed field, it's necessary to
document already in-use implementations.)
> Now, if you do the statistic work to show that the absolute majority
> of our packages use "." as a delimiter inside dates,
As mentioned before, the fact that far too many use 8-digit dates are
already in use was what made me write that bug report -- to _change_
that:
→ grep-available -F Version -e '(^|[^0-9])(20|19)[0-9]{6}($|[^0-9])' -s Package
| wc -l
210
→ grep-available -F Version -e
'(^|[^0-9])(20|19)[0-9]{2}\.[0-9]{2}\.[0-9]{2}($|[^0-9])' -s Package | wc -l
17
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
