Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (155 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Re: Proper version scheme for packages from git, hg, svn, ...

On Friday 2014-01-10 21:06, Adam Spiers wrote:
10.09.2013 15:33, Jan Engelhardt пишет:
On Tuesday 2013-09-10 13:22, Sascha Peilicke wrote:

I'd like to gather some input on versioning schemes used for
packaging SCM snapshots.

Pattern 5 "X+git.1363873583.8dfab15" is terribly long, and hashes are
useless in many situations

Should I assume that guidelines at the link have been fixed

They haven't.

They were not broken, so they did not need fixing.

Well, I spammed the thread with my opinions, and IMHO I *believe* that
I successfully countered any objections to the scheme which my team
favours ... but I'm not sure whether the fact that there were no more
*publically stated* objections counts as a consensus

Didn't you read the fineprint - "period for appeal is 8 weeks,
starting with the reception of [last mail in discussion]"? :)

Let's recap for "1363873583.8dfab15" (TS.HASH):

* The version ought to be monotonically increasing somehow. The
timestamp does that, sure, but so does the tag-offset (for a given
branch that is being continuously packaged) while at the same time,
the latter is much shorter.

* If people ship different branches, they do so in different BSprjs
(cf. network:samba:), or with different package names (cf.
squid/squid3/squid-beta) rather than (a) implanting that into
%version or even (b) implying it through the hash.

* Adam Spiers says: "hashes are needed even when history is linear,
because then you know exactly which source revision the package came
from". This is a Microsoft Balloon[1] argument; it _might_ be usable
in _some obscure_ way; you can have your hash. But that does not
change the fact that it is still very much a niche-indicator.
The kernel people (samba too?) recognized that and placed it into
%description instead - with complete branch info by the way.

In summary: objections have been objectioned, leaving the arguments
for TS.HASH with what it seems to be of no to little weight.
You can still use TS.HASH, but you won't find a majority (in
terms of mass) to back it.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups