Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:16:58 -0600 From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com> To: Michael Haro <mharo@area51.fremont.ca.us> Cc: FreeBSD Ports Team <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Version Numbering Question Message-ID: <20000320201658.J3107@lovett.com> In-Reply-To: <20000320154048.A86305@area51.fremont.ca.us>; from mharo@area51.fremont.ca.us on Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 03:40:49PM -0800 References: <20000320154048.A86305@area51.fremont.ca.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 03:40:49PM -0800, Michael Haro wrote: > Hi, I noticed lots of ports violating the handbook guidelines and using > versioning like -1.2.3pl4. > > For ports that *have* version numbers and then patch levels, should > we allow 'pl' in the version or change the version number in the ports > to something like 1.2.3p4? Isn't this similar to the example in the guidelines: xvgr-2.10pl1 xvgr-2.10.1 pl allowed only when no major/minor version numbers so in this case, we just replace the 'pl' with a '.' ?? -aDe -- Ade Lovett, Austin, TX. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000320201658.J3107>