Hi again
On 02/07/2024 01:13, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Monday, July 1, 2024 7:07:16 PM EDT Alec Leamas wrote:
On 02/07/2024 00:54, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Monday, July 1, 2024 6:46:06 PM EDT Alec Leamas wrote:
If you switch hats for a moment: have you any advice for upstream in
this situation?
8763.5.10
Yes, I have had a similar idea using 10000 instead of 8763 to make it
stand out less. In my eyes, this is worse and will lead to that the
package versions does not match the "public" version like 5.10.2.
But if the list agrees that this is the correct solution so be it. To be
honest, it might be a hard sell upstream.
Next build is:
8763.5.10~8764
Why?
--alec
Because the '~' means less than. It's a way to add the build number to the
interim versions in the future without causing the same problem again. I
guess it should have been 8763.5.11~8764, if 5.11 is the next 'real' version.
There is absolutely no need of build numbers in the version, it's just a
sad legacy.
Let's drop this subthread, keeping eyes on the ball: what is a sane version?
--a
