1 |
>>>>> On Sun, 28 Jan 2018, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>> > This specification currently defines one section: ``[structure]``. |
4 |
>> > This section defines one or more repository structure definitions |
5 |
>> > using sequential integer keys. The definition keyed as ``0`` |
6 |
>> > is the most preferred structure. The package manager should use |
7 |
>> > the first structure format it recognizes as supported, and ignore any |
8 |
>> > it does not recognize. If this section is not present, the package |
9 |
>> > manager should behave as if only ``flat`` structure were supported. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> It is not at all clear from this how integer keys are ordered. The |
12 |
>> paragraph only says that "0" is most preferred, but says nothing about |
13 |
>> comparison of other numbers. |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> For example, if there are keys "-1", "0", and "1" (these are |
16 |
>> "sequential integer keys", right?), what is their order of preference? |
17 |
|
18 |
> Please suggest a better wording. The idea was to use 0=, 1=, 2=... |
19 |
|
20 |
"... using non-negative integer keys. The definition with the |
21 |
smallest key is the most preferred structure. The package manager |
22 |
should ignore any formats it does not recognize." |
23 |
|
24 |
Ulrich |