Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Danny van Dyk <kugelfang@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: Steve Dibb <beandog@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:42:00
Message-Id: 200704242154.20811.kugelfang@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86 by Steve Dibb
1 Am Dienstag, 24. April 2007 schrieb Steve Dibb:
2 > > Hi all,
3 > >
4 > > [CC'ing council@g.o as requested by GLEP amendment from March 8th,
5 > > 2007]
6 > >
7 > > A subset of council members decided today that multiple version
8 > > suffixes are illegal in the tree pending further notice. This
9 > > decission can be appealed at the next Council meeting. If there is
10 > > sufficient public demand, an earlier meeting can be held.
11 > >
12 > > This decission has been made to prevent sufficient precedence for
13 > > unilateral changes to the tree structure. So far the following
14 > > package versions are considered illegal:
15 > >
16 > > media-viode/mplayer-1.0_rc2_pre20070321-r4
17 > > media-video/transcode-1.0.3_rc2_p20070310-r1
18 >
19 > MPlayer needs to be fixed, though it's in the same boat as transcode
20 > ... it's a release candidate plus a patch level.
21 >
22 > Multimedia apps are infamous for rarely having releases, so we are
23 > stuck with SVN snapshots.
24 >
25 > What we really need is a suffix for RCS systems, since that's what
26 > they really are.
27 >
28 > However, if anyone has any suggestions for naming schemes in the
29 > meantime, I'm all ears.
30
31 Only a short response, as I'm a bit in a hurry right now. From
32 #gentoo-council earlier:
33
34 18:25 <@robbat2> make him covert it to "_rc%04d%04d%02d%02d",$RC,$YEAR,
35 $MONTH,$DAY
36
37 I hope that helps,
38 Danny
39 --
40 Danny van Dyk <kugelfang@g.o>
41 Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project
42 --
43 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies