[csw-maintainers] Why are packages named in a "creative", non-consistent way?

[Peter Bonivart]

I'm talking about the sparconly tag on these two recently updated packages:

libxft2:2.1.14,REV=2010.06.03.sparconly - A client-side font API for X
applications
xpm:3.5.8,REV=2010.05.30_sparconly - X11 pixmap library

libxft2 used to be named like this:

libxft2-2.1.14,REV=2010.05.30-SunOS5.9-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz
libxft2-2.1.14,REV=2010.05.30-SunOS5.9-i386-CSW.pkg.gz

Why not just update the sparc package with a current date and not mess
with the rest? Does this have to do with the "release process" in any
way?

Why is one separated with a dot and the other with an underscore? If
this is needed at all why not put the tag with the software version,
e.g. 2.1.14sparconly,REV=2010.06.03?

-- 
/peter