Archives
Archives
| From: | Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should _p0 be allowed as a version suffix? | ||
| Date: | Sun, 06 May 2007 01:22:24 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20070506023331.35836885@maya | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should _p0 be allowed as a version suffix? by Zac Medico |
||
| 1 | On Sat, 05 May 2007 18:02:30 -0700 |
| 2 | Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 | |
| 4 | > Should we ban the _p0 suffix from the tree |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Possibly, though I don't see a real reason for it. |
| 7 | |
| 8 | > or should be change the version comparison behavior so that |
| 9 | > implicit _p0 is less than explicit _p0? |
| 10 | |
| 11 | No. |
| 12 | -- |
| 13 | gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should _p0 be allowed as a version suffix? | Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> |