| 1 |
On Saturday 29 March 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > The reason I'm emailing -dev is to ensure there is consensus on |
| 4 |
> > leaving off an explicit -r0 in the ebuild name- long term, it seems |
| 5 |
> > folks always followed the rule but it needs to be codified due to |
| 6 |
> > problems with uniquely identifying the ebuild in the repo. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Even ignoring the unique identifiers, banning explicit -r0 globally is |
| 9 |
> inconsistent anyway. We already allow and use _alpha and _alpha0 (which |
| 10 |
> mean the same thing) and so on. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
those arent the same thing. -r# is a Gentoo-specific revision marking. |
| 13 |
_alpha/_rc/etc... are used to track upstream. if upstream uses _alpha0, then |
| 14 |
it makes our lives easier to also use _alpha0. -r0 has no benefit and it |
| 15 |
isnt inconsistent as that portion of the version is for Gentoo use only. |
| 16 |
-mike |
Archives