Re: RFC changes in version numbering schemes

[Uwe Dippel <udippel_(_at_)_uniten_(_dot_)_edu_(_dot_)_my>]

On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 00:04:15 +0100, Marc Espie wrote:

> Opinions ?

If you dared to be radical, you'd split the name into 3 parts:
generic name - human readable version - unix time.

That would read
python-expat-2.3.5-1131013320

python-expat: package name
2.3.5: for us humans to know the base version
1131013320: actual version to be used by pkg_foo

Irrespective of version numbers going up or down, the package tools will
only look at the unix time and update (including reverting to a lower
'human readable version') to a later (in unix time) version.

Of course, for us humans a patched version may as well read
python-expat-2.3.5p2-1131013320
or similar. No package tool would ever look at that p2; it is part of the
human readable version of the package identifier.

If tomorrow an older version is required, it could be put up as 
python-expat-2.1.3r1-1131099720
With the unix time 86400 seconds more recent, pkg_add will update to this
version. With r1 being a *possible* indicator for going back in base
version to the human *only*.

Uwe