rpms/uqm/devel uqm.spec,1.12,1.13

[Jesse Keating]

On Friday 20 April 2007 12:11:58 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Well, I'd do it like that, too. But on the other hand: isn't this up to
> the decision of the packager if he wants to introduce a further decimal
> point? I assume some people want to say "foo-1.0-1* are all based on the
> same spec logic"

I thought at one point we had a policy that the release should be a whole 
number if at all possible, to avoid sillyness like 
foo-3.2-1.0.0.2.2.3.2.3.1.1  However I cannot find this guideline anymore.  I 
prefer using whole numbers as it is easier for somebody who has to modify my 
package after me to understand the numbering scheme.  If there is only one 
number, simple, increment it.  If there are a series of numbers by decimal, 
which one do I bump and why, and what might break if I just go from 1.2.2.3.2 
to 2?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070420/ff1d3e13/attachment.sig>