Dne st 14. listopadu 2012 Calvin Morrison napsal(a):
> Let me further explain.
>
> example: krita-trinity-2012-06-12-a2c24b62-i686.rpm.xz
>
> has: name of package, trinity, date and git hash
>
> On 14 November 2012 14:00, Darrell Anderson <humanreadable@...> 
wrote:
> > > For git names just do the date it was built. Not as precise but
> > > easier
> >
> > to understand
> >
> > A challenge with using the date is GIT is a moving target. Any
> > version method used represents a snapshot moment of the repository.
> > The GIT shortlog version better represents that snapshot moment than
> > a date. A person could update a local repository but build a package
> > set a week later. In that case the date would be incorrect.
> >
> > If there was a way to pull a date from within the sources then a date
> > could provide a better snapshot representation of the sources. But
> > all Trinity packagers would need to use the same mechanism to pull
> > the date to be consistent with one another.
> >
> > Darrell
> >
> >

This is an unnecessarily long. Date information can be misleading - not 
related to the date of GIT version. Not solve the correct sequence of 
multiple versions in one day. In this case, the "meaningless number" is 
more neutral. Simply only going to increase with each pre-release.

Slavek
--