Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 20:25:21 +0100 From: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Scheidell <scheidell@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PORTVERSION=1.0.0b Message-ID: <CADLo839p4ongYuW9h-qZsDaE=XRM5ETN5rjSrNmp-mMov8LfPw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4FB943B0.6040501@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FB8E67C.5030001@FreeBSD.org> <4FB90160.9060002@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4FB9437D.5050804@FreeBSD.org> <4FB943B0.6040501@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20 May 2012 20:19, Michael Scheidell <scheidell@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 5/20/12 3:18 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote: >> >> Try setting DISTVERSION=1.0.0b and let the ports generate PORTVERSION >> make -V PORTVERSION >> 1.0.0.b >> >> ok, like that? >> > any porters handbook, committers habndbook documentation on that? as in why > '1.0.0.b' is preferred over '1.0.0b'? Because as much as possible, we try to standardise things like version numbers and rc scripts, so people get a more consistent experience, rather than bowing to the particular upstream/maintainer's view of how versions work. Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo839p4ongYuW9h-qZsDaE=XRM5ETN5rjSrNmp-mMov8LfPw>