List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 02:59:39PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 30 March 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > those arent the same thing. -r# is a Gentoo-specific revision
> > > marking. _alpha/_rc/etc... are used to track upstream. if upstream
> > > uses _alpha0, then it makes our lives easier to also use _alpha0.
> > > -r0 has no benefit and it isnt inconsistent as that portion of the
> > > version is for Gentoo use only.
> > Every other part allows the magic 0 behaviour. Banning it for one part
> > only is another one of those 'special case' rules we're trying to avoid
> > because no-one knows them.
> i dont particularly care about -r0, i'm just stating that banning
> _alpha0/etc... is not acceptable.
Lay out your reasons please; the meaning doesn't differ (same version
due to implicit 0 after all), and as I've pointed out an extreme
minority are affected. Basically, looking to lock it down from a
consistancy standpoint- in light of that, and that 15 ebuilds are
affected out of ~24242, it's not seeming like it's losing much.