[Bug 239282] Review Request: seaview - Graphical multiple sequence alignment editor

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: seaview - Graphical multiple sequence alignment editor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239282





------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org  2007-05-08 03:29 EST -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> To me it seems pointless to prefix the date with a 0. in this case.  You will
> never have a number low enough that upstream can't trump you and release
> something like 0.01 which would be < EVR than yours.  I would think this would
> be the perfect case for an epoch if upstream gets a clue and versions the
> package at a later date.

This got me thinking, and I had another look at what we currently have in FC-6.
I think it would actually make more sense to put zero as a version number, and
follow the pre-release snapshot guidelines for the release number.  This way,
when upstream so decides, there is a very good probability that the version
assigned will be higher than zero (0) and we avoid the epoch thing.  Deal ?

new SPEC: ftp://ftp.licr.org/pub/seaview.spec
new SRPM: ftp://ftp.licr.org/pub/seaview-0-0.20070417.src.rpm


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.