From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 26 13:02:50 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C0B16A417 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:02:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com) Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7443C13C4B0 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:02:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id w9so966596mue for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:02:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=y+RmNEwnsggzXsrcXQoYhStQMHfzksKzHTglo1H9N74=; b=FL6LCfJkCZRnVtGRTR5jQvXU0e8D4ARyZEg25lXkZnGp7RrHbAPt0t1jwzApy+9+4Gwqw89p52OlWVjzx+Zw+7YRjBqd3LLbce2aZryp1IUpNqmeWpl6S48MWUbGufwSeGu4WB3/27f3R+TvGEdgWMbe7Dtokzq8ji+7XnuJ1qs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=FZ93whNIev1yLTAKkryEcazwBTIshaI5ZH01kR1j6G0qJN6EKYuVryVvvolh99qUWDpAr7TrnbuUgGRrf3GicyjpOe3W2yySbBIat3hwKfZw8Fzw11Tv5PJ9pE4qBUj8HTfTfwz58ZfqmqYRze3d7SVhfMvDYq/y2UosxGBmQlo= Received: by 10.82.183.19 with SMTP id g19mr6046382buf.1193403768803; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.82.120.4 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <786602c60710260602o6ec5342fw3e4206bb5ad73cd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:02:48 +0800 From: "Thomas Zander" To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <471F1C83.5010209@commit.it> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <786602c60710210500xd709756x4cb714666a1c39d5@mail.gmail.com> <18203.24753.63146.314861@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <786602c60710210757o29413e79i297f30e639db6a24@mail.gmail.com> <471F1C83.5010209@commit.it> Subject: Re: Please test: mplayer 1.0 rc2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:02:51 -0000 On 24/10/2007, Angelo Turetta wrote: > May I ask you: if the software is at 1.0.rc2, why the port version is > set at 0.99.xx? Because a healthy numbering scheme (as in 'numbers') is more useful for correct version tracking than that ludicrous approach some people are insisting on. > You might want to make some test on your own, but in my experience using > a version like 1.0.r2 is supported by the port subsystem. I mean, if you > label a version as 1.0.r2, the final version 1.0 should be considered > greater than 1.0.r2 (and so allow users to upgrade automatically). Well, let's see what happens when we test some mplayer version strings: $ pkg_version -t 0.6 0.9 < $ pkg_version -t 0.9 1.0pre7 < $ pkg_version -t 1.0pre7 1.0pre7try2 > *kaboom* Either a software *is* 1.0 or it is not. Therefore, as long as I am going to maintain that port, I will try to stick with sensible numbers. Riggs