[csw-maintainers] [policy] Re: feature patching, and naming

[Peter Bonivart]

On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Just for clarification, are you saying that a you'd see:
>
> 1.2.3,p,sparconly,REV=YYYY.MM.DD

This does not look good.

> I presume so, as the alternate isn't very nice:
>
> 1.2.3,psparconly,REV=...

Neither does this.

> A third option is to have only one additional field between upstream
> version info and REV= that contains single letter sets like:
>
> 1.2.3,pi,REV=YYYY.MM.DD

This is the best in my opinion. Let's treat it as flags and only allow
to pick from a fixed list to keep it from getting carried away and be
easily checked.

p = patched
i = i386 only
s = sparc only

>> Lets avoid people creating
>> 1.2.3,ithinkthisisokaybuttryitandletmeknowmkay,REV=YYYY.MM.DD

This will also be hard to automatically check.

/peter