On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, John Calcote wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Cristian Rodríguez
wrote: The behaviour seems to be correct..I fail to see why you **need** a change on this..
What does this mean? I didn't say I **needed** anything. I simply asked if there was a way to stop the auto-increment function during my build system debugging sessions.
I think it's silly to publish a new package with a revision number of 71, when no one has ever seen the package before. It would be nice to publish the package with a revision number of 1 the first time. If I then need to make changes to the package and publish a new one, I'd like my users to see that package with a revision number of 2 -- even if I've spent a fair amount of time modifying patches or spec files between the two published revisions.
Finally, it would be **nice** if the OBS system automatically performed this task for me, based on when I enable or disable package repository publication. I really don't see it as being a difficult task either, for that matter.
Your method of looking at the revision number has some quirks: a) Every file is actually released, thought not throught the open interface, but everytime throught the API. b) How do you want to distinguish between changes you have done and automatic rebuilds? c) How do you want to track down problems? You cannot find out the OBS repository version from your revision number anymore and thus it's hard to find a bug in a special release. d) Some more things I forgot. Why do you assume releases must be incremented by one always? The only real requirement is, than a later version has a higher number. The major and minor version are for the end user. The revisions are for package management systems. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)