On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 05:42:11PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 25. 02. 20 9:50, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>Upgrade path may be problematic if you update Fn to a version in less commit
>than the update for Fn-1 (ie: you update F32 to 1.0 in 1 commit and update F31
>to 1.0 in 2 commits, suddenly you have F32 with 1.0-1 and F31 with 1.0-2).
I don't consider that an issue. It's not super elegant, but since we
do distro-sync on upgrades, it shuld be fine.
Hmm, I don't do distro-sync and in general I think upgrade path is
something that should be preserved.
What about doing
<name>-<version>-<dist>.<commits-since-version-bump>?
This means that upgrade path not affected by the number of commits or
builds in the older release.
The numbers <commits-since-version-bump> in different branches cannot
be meaningfully compared. Those numbers only make sense in the context
of a specific branch, so they should be ordered after <dist>.
Zbyszek