From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from re-prd-fep-048.btinternet.com (mailomta18-re.btinternet.com [213.120.69.111]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D43453858C3A for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:04:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D43453858C3A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dronecode.org.uk Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=dronecode.org.uk Received: from re-prd-rgout-003.btmx-prd.synchronoss.net ([10.2.54.6]) by re-prd-fep-048.btinternet.com with ESMTP id <20210921200437.QMNI1873.re-prd-fep-048.btinternet.com@re-prd-rgout-003.btmx-prd.synchronoss.net> for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 21:04:37 +0100 Authentication-Results: btinternet.com; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jonturney@btinternet.com; bimi=skipped X-SNCR-Rigid: 613A8F07018C07DB X-Originating-IP: [81.129.146.163] X-OWM-Source-IP: 81.129.146.163 (GB) X-OWM-Env-Sender: jonturney@btinternet.com X-VadeSecure-score: verdict=clean score=0/300, class=clean X-RazorGate-Vade: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrudeihedgtddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuueftkffvkffujffvgffngfevqffopdfqfgfvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddunecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomheplfhonhcuvfhurhhnvgihuceojhhonhdrthhurhhnvgihsegurhhonhgvtghouggvrdhorhhgrdhukheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptedufeefhfdthffhtddvledvteeuuedvhfejkeeufffhgeekvdevheevgfetvdfgnecuffhomhgrihhnpehfvgguohhrrghprhhojhgvtghtrdhorhhgpdgthihgfihinhdrtghomhenucfkphepkedurdduvdelrddugeeirdduieefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehhvghloheplgduledvrdduieekrddurddutdefngdpihhnvghtpeekuddruddvledrudegiedrudeifedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehjohhnrdhtuhhrnhgvhiesughrohhnvggtohguvgdrohhrghdruhhkpdhrtghpthhtoheptgihghifihhnqdgrphhpshestgihghifihhnrdgtohhm X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict: clean 0 X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification: clean Received: from [192.168.1.103] (81.129.146.163) by re-prd-rgout-003.btmx-prd.synchronoss.net (5.8.716.04) (authenticated as jonturney@btinternet.com) id 613A8F07018C07DB for cygwin-apps@cygwin.com; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 21:04:37 +0100 Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: dash 0.5.11.5 To: "cygwin-apps@cygwin.com" References: <87ee9j92m0.fsf@Otto.invalid> <6afad1d6-d3ea-7903-151e-e50f6a9a98ab@SystematicSw.ab.ca> <5212e253-7778-f034-d1a9-c4acf0feac40@cornell.edu> <04aa78a5-c925-b04f-52aa-69111b919444@Shaw.ca> <67547c41-55c4-743a-1194-3d47bb5562cd@cornell.edu> <33d08934-9b57-e7be-307f-ec6393c8f124@cornell.edu> From: Jon Turney Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 21:04:14 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <33d08934-9b57-e7be-307f-ec6393c8f124@cornell.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3570.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FORGED_SPF_HELO, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Cygwin package maintainer discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:04:41 -0000 On 21/09/2021 20:20, Ken Brown via Cygwin-apps wrote: > [Redirected from the main cygwin list.] > > On 9/21/2021 3:12 PM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: >> On 9/21/2021 1:55 PM, Brian Inglis via Cygwin wrote: >>> On 2021-09-21 10:58, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: >>>> On 9/21/2021 11:29 AM, Brian Inglis wrote: >>>>> so suggest we mandate release 0 for test versions, as that would >>>>> follow naturally. >>>> >>>> There's no need for that. >>> >>> Maybe it would be a good suggestion then? Release numbers starting with 0 already have a defined meaning. They are to be used for upstream pre-release versions e.g pkg-1.0-0.1.g12345678 is a pre-release of pkg 1.0, since this sorts before pkg-1.0-1 See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Versioning_Examples, included by reference in https://cygwin.com/packaging-package-files.html, for some more examples. > From my point of view as a maintainer, there are two main reasons I use > test releases. > > 1. For a package in which I'm also an upstream contributor (like Emacs > or TeX Live or Cygwin), I might want to make a test release of an > upcoming upstream release to catch bugs prior to the release.  I > generally use release numbers like 0.1, 0.2,... for these. > > 2. If there's a new upstream release of a package that I'm less familiar > with, I just want to make a standard release, but I might not be > confident that there's no breakage on Cygwin.  So I start with a test > release (with release number 1), and if no problems are reported after a > few weeks I untest it, keeping the release number unchanged. Yeah. Brian's suggestion doesn't always work in this case. If we wanted to a test release of pkg after pkg-1.0-5, without any upstream changes, it would be pkg-1.0-6, we can't reset the release to 0. > I personally wouldn't have any use for a release number 0 in either case.