Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd go with 1.0rel+1.0c. Fix it for real with version 1.1.
Okies, thanks. Actually this was what I first considered, but upon
reading the Policy Manual I saw other options, so I needed to ask. =)
--
ZAK B. ELEP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Regi
[Zak B. Elep]
> In a related problem, I'm packaging the latest version of gtklp at
> 1.0c. My earlier package is 1.0 but using version 1.0rel (I was
> stupid, but I think I should have slapped upstream earlier for using
> a very inadequate versioning scheme).
I'd go with 1.0rel+1.0c. Fix it for
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Slap upstream for having broken and confusing version numbers. Dpkg will
> not understand that, either, as will many users who do not bother to
> read the upstream web pages.
In a related problem, I'm packaging the latest version of gtklp at
1.0c. My
> I'll do that (they also used 1.7b which means "second release candidate
> for 1.7), but I probably won't be able to rewrite history and make 1.55
> disappear...
I had this problem before and used the equivalent of 1.70.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubsc
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:53:43AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> thanks to the thread about watchfiles for sourceforge projects I now
>> have a "working" watch file for jabref which I intend to package.
>> However, they used version numbers t
Niv Altivanik (Debian) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> does ([0-9].[0-9])([0-9]?) help ?
> i noticed having 2 pairs of () added a . in the Debian version.
Thank you, that does it fine.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:53:43AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks to the thread about watchfiles for sourceforge projects I now
> have a "working" watch file for jabref which I intend to package.
> However, they used version numbers that lacked a dot - 1.55 is meant to
> be in between
does ([0-9].[0-9])([0-9]?) help ?
i noticed having 2 pairs of () added a . in the Debian version.
Regards,
--
Niv Altivanik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian::GNU/Linux::Addict, Wannabe Debian Developper,
please test my packages: http://cxhome.ath.cx/debian
pgpuQ7Q0xO7NZ.pgp
Description: PGP signat
Hi,
thanks to the thread about watchfiles for sourceforge projects I now
have a "working" watch file for jabref which I intend to package.
However, they used version numbers that lacked a dot - 1.55 is meant to
be in between 1.5 and 1.6, but now of course it is regarded as newer
than current 1.7.
9 matches
Mail list logo
