question about PORTVERSIONing

[Bryan Drewery]

On 11/12/2014 8:16 PM, Koichiro IWAO wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have a question about determining PORTVERSION.
> 
> I was told to correct PORTVERSION 0.0.yyyy.mm.dd style [1] by a committer.
> devel/ruby-build port now has yyyymmdd style PORTVERSION like 20141028 and
> yyyymmdd is the upstream's official versioning system.  I'm not using date
> instead of version number since upstream has no version information but
> just using through upstream version to PORTVERSION.
> 
> Do I have to use 0.0.yyyy.mm.dd in such case?
> 
> [1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194646
> 

Use whatever you want as long as it is monotonically increasing. No
requirement for "0.0". You can use YYYYMMDD or YYYY.MM.DDDD if you wish.
If upstream tags their releases like this it is even better to follow it.

The idea of using "0.0." in front is a "just in case" upstream follows a
new tag scheme, but we already have PORTEPOCH for those situations. Why
add an arbitrary 0.0 into the tag if upstream doesn't use that?

-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20141112/f8350a5e/attachment.sig>