question about PORTVERSIONing
meta at vmeta.jp
Thu Nov 13 05:36:11 UTC 2014
I use upstream version as it is, thanks!
2014-11-13 12:04 Bryan Drewery wrote:
> On 11/12/2014 8:16 PM, Koichiro IWAO wrote:
>> I have a question about determining PORTVERSION.
>> I was told to correct PORTVERSION 0.0.yyyy.mm.dd style  by a
>> devel/ruby-build port now has yyyymmdd style PORTVERSION like 20141028
>> yyyymmdd is the upstream's official versioning system. I'm not using
>> instead of version number since upstream has no version information
>> just using through upstream version to PORTVERSION.
>> Do I have to use 0.0.yyyy.mm.dd in such case?
>>  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
> If upstream tags their releases like this it is even better to follow
> The idea of using "0.0." in front is a "just in case" upstream follows
> 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?
`whois vmeta.jp | nkf -w`
meta <meta at vmeta.jp>
More information about the freebsd-ports