On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 10:22:48AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Oct 04 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > I include it because it makes it unambiguous which version of policy
> > the team referred to when preparing the package. Micro policy
> > releases are not supposed to cha
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:30:37PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 4.1.1.0
>
> Policy § 5.6.11, after describing the meaning of the digits in the
> policy version, reads:
>
> | Thus only the first three components of the policy version are
> | significant in the S
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:38:30PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> what are the practical negative effect of
> putting the 4th digit in the Standards-Version field ?
I can't really think of any, except consistency across packages, and
perhaps being a tad less confusing to see a 4th digit when you a
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.1.1.0
Policy § 5.6.11, after describing the meaning of the digits in the
policy version, reads:
| Thus only the first three components of the policy version are
| significant in the Standards-Version control field, and so either
| these three components or all fo
4 matches
Mail list logo
