On Wednesday, 30 November 2016 at 16:07, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Dominik 'Rathann'
Mierzejewski <
dominik(a)greysector.net> wrote:
[...]
I'm not sure where your Version == 1.0 comes from. If they're
versioned
> only by date now, then you have two options. Use Version: 0 in the new
> package in anticipation of upstream eventually reintroducing semantic
> versioning. Or, Version: YYYYMMDD. Admittedly, the latter looks nicer
> and upstream already said they'll stick to it.
>
The Version == 1.0 comes from the source code of the fonts themselves.
Running 'grep "Version" *.afm' tells me that there are all files with
Version == 1.0, except two of them (which have Version
If they don't have the same version then it doesn't make sense to use
the version of *some* of them as base.
> If you worry about upstream versioning sanity, then stick with
> Version: 0
> and follow the snapshot versioning guidelines.
>
> > There's also one more option, and that is to base the package on
> > upstream's git repository and the snapshot scheme, because we
> > would be using snapshot string in the package name anyway. And it
> > would also solve one more issue that upstream is not shipping
> > license files in the archive. (I have already contacted to correct
> > this.)
>
> The exact location of the source doesn't matter too much as long as it's
> official and pristine. I agree it might be better to use the git repo
> directly since it contains both the licence indication and its full
> text.
>
Upstream has heard to my request and fixed it. (
http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697390)
And yes, what Douhlas wrote is correct (about the 35 fonts), and I will
have that noted in the %description section.
Anyway, since determining the Version field is still unclear, I think the
most sense to me right now is to proceed with option 2) - IOW - to bypass
the versioning from URW++ completely, and have Version field based on
snapshot string, in a way:
X.Y.Z == YYYY.MM.DD
Or do you some problem with this approach?
As I said, please do not invent the version on your own. Please apply
the existing snapshot guidelines instead, i.e.:
Version: 0
Release: 0.N.YYYYMMDD
or
Release: 0.N.YYYYMMDDgitHASH
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion
http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"