Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Bug#1135785: Suggest starting date-based version
numbers with 0.x"):
> Won't this do the wrong thing when the "0.20260505" snapshot is
> superseded by upstream release 0.1 or similar? Upstreams don't always
> start numbering from 1.0, especially if they're using "semver" where
> 0.x releases have special semantics.
Good point.
> In some of my packages where the upstream has not yet made any releases
> (like src:openjk) I've used a version like 0~20260505, which avoids that.
>
> I've also seen ~20260505 suggested, but I think that breaks the
> least-astonishment rule that a version number should usually start with
> a number.
I think your practice is the one we should recommend. And the fact
that I got this wrong seems to show - to me at least :-) - that we
should tell people what the best answer is.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <[email protected]> These opinions are my own.
Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk,
that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
