Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> This package just numbers their tarballs using the subversion release
> number. For example, 'r8' and 'r11':
> As far as I'm aware they are not planning on using "real" version
> numbers at any time in the future, nor have they used real version
> numbers in the past.
Note that the crux of this statement is "at any time in the future". If
upstream dies and then is revitalized later and the new project lead
starts releasing tarballs, you could need epoch to get out of the
versioning scheme you choose. (However, epoch does exist, so it's not
like you can't escape).
> I don't understand which if any of these guidelines apply to this
> In particular, what should the Version be? (And while we're at it,
> what should the Release be?)
In my personal descending order of preference I would do one of these:
Urgh, ... insane overengineering, IMNSHO.
All you are doing is adding confusion on user-expections on versions
strings and avoidable hassle to package maintainers.