Le 14/03/2016 00:07, Daniel Reurich a écrit :
> On 14/03/16 11:30, aitor_czr wrote:
>> >
>> >On 03/13/2016 10:41 PM, Didier Kryn<kryn@???> wrote:
>>> >> I agree. And I think most people on this list would vote like me
>>> >>for a sequential version number rather than a date. However maybe Jude
>>> >>had the intent to start the numbering when he delivers a first official
>>> >>release. This might be the reason for prefixing with 0. May I suggest
>>> >>using the hash as a minor number and 0 as major?
>>> >>
> I'd suggest using a version like:
> 0.1.jude<date version>+<devuan release starting with 1>
>
> That way when Jude does switch to versioned releases we can assume his
> version scheme easily assuming that he starts with > 0.1.
Guys, shouldn't we rename this thread "Packaging Vdev" ?
Didier
::
[DNG] Packaging Vdev (was Testing v…
