Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 20 Sep 2018 07:44:13 -0600
From:      Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org>
To:        koobs@freebsd.org
Cc:        franco@lastsummer.de, ports@freebsd.org, madpilot@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: net/ntopng: version jump by an order of magnitude
Message-ID:  <CAP7rwcjXUuCUTTP9wXRZyiPkPHZC823_R-6wF6x4fa_osp3Gzw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <cd6bfc78-8006-0333-0832-ad0095cce921@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <044E02B5-BE6D-4D90-96A4-B2C555707F1C@lastsummer.de> <cd6bfc78-8006-0333-0832-ad0095cce921@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:32 PM Kubilay Kocak <koobs@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/09/2018 6:40 am, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Small question:
> >
> > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/commit/0585180d
> >
> > ... has a typo in the version number which was an ISO date
> > originally.  Are we using this new date format now or is there
> > going to be a PORTEPOCH amendment?
>
> Up to the maintainer ultimately.
>
> To avoid PORTEPOCH, either the typo'd datestamp scheme (0XX for month)
> would need to continue until 3.7, or an alternate scheme created that is
> both meaningful and > than (pkg version -t old new) the current value.
>
> Or fix the typo and add PORTEPOCH.
>
> Personally, I'd go the first option as it's only a minor typo that
> doesn't affect ongoing existing-scheme version updates, and is the more
> transient of the two (PORTEPOCH lives forever, bad scheme only lasts
> till 3.7).
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Franco

The 'd' is arbitrary. If a different, higher letter were used, the
date could be fixed.

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
adamw@adamw.org
https://www.adamw.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAP7rwcjXUuCUTTP9wXRZyiPkPHZC823_R-6wF6x4fa_osp3Gzw>