On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:00:47AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 08:53:58AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> In my personal descending order of preference I would do one of these:
> Version: 0
> Release: 1.rNNN
For the moment I've used:
Ignore the Version number for now - I can change that to just be '0'
later if necessary.
Looks good to me. If version is set to 0, this is the safest choice
with regard to avoiding epochs in case upstream changes something
afterwards. This is also the numbering that is the most different from
upstream, but as long as you are aware of that...