Re: Package naming conventions

Dave Page wrote:

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr]
>>Sent: 08 August 2003 14:51
>>To: Raphaël Enrici; Dave Page
>>Cc: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
>>Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Package naming conventions
>>Dear all,
>>I agree with Raphaël. We cannot have two naming conventions
>>for technical
>>reasons. It is not possible to change the version of an RPM
>>at file system
>>level. Furthermore, users should be able to install from
>>snapshots, then
>>upgrade with beta, then install snapshots, etc...
>>
>>
>The problem is that the date is only applicable to snapshots. Release versions may be created anytime after CVS is tagged.
>What do other projects do?
>
If you look to what I did in debian packages,
the actual beta is 0.9.0-0.1
if we build a snapshot release of a new 0.9.0 (what we shouldn't as it
would be incompatible with what we said before), it will be named
0.9.0-0.1+cvsYYYYMMDD.1 which is greater than 0.9.0-0.1 so it's ok.
if we build a snapshot release of a new devel branch i.e 0.9.1 (what
should be the right way of handling this), it will be named
0.9.0-0.0[AND NOT 1]+cvsYYYYMMDD.1 which is also greater than 0.9.0-0.1,
so upgrade is also ok.

IMHO it's one of the good way of handling this.

Do you agree ?

Thanks,

Raphaël