[Kolab-devel] Kolab server version numbering

[Thomas Arendsen Hein]

* Gunnar Wrobel <wrobel at pardus.de> [20071015 07:22]:
> Sascha Wilde <wilde at intevation.de> writes:
> > Gunnar Wrobel <wrobel at pardus.de> writes:
> >> Concerning the "_betaX+cvs" I'm still against using the "+" sign :)
> >> I > >> know it clarifies the meaning as "version X PLUS something".
> >
> > I like the "+" sign for the very reason you mentioned, it clearly
> > signals in what way the version differs from the release.
> >
> >> But I never saw a "+" in a source package file name when I packaged
> >> something for Gentoo. So I'm sceptic about using it.
> >
> > This is a very week argument.  As long as there is no technical
> > reason not to do it, please use the most readable variant.
> 
> As mentioned I don't have anything specific for being against the
> "+". This is just gut feeling :)
> 
> It matches the POSIX "Fully portable filenames" though:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filename#Comparison_of_file_name_limitations
> 
> But that still makes it no valid technical reason :)

Debian makes frequent use of + chars in version numbers, e.g.:
vim-7.0-122+1etch3
sawfish-1.3+cvs20061004-1

And if you look at your own system you might find things like
libstdc++
g++

(just try "ls /usr/*/*+*")

And now that I had seen some foo.cvs version strings in this thread,
I more and more think that using foo+cvs is so much more readable
that this only a little bit uncommon char is worth being used.

Above URL reassured me that only Windows VFAT might suffer here, but
for CVS snapshots I really don't care about that.

So now I say: we should use foo+cvs

Thomas

-- 
thomas at intevation.de - http://intevation.de/~thomas/ - OpenPGP key: 0x5816791A
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrueck - Register: Amtsgericht Osnabrueck, HR B 18998
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner