[MLton] self-compiled mlton on redhat 9

[Gerard Milmeister]

On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 06:59, Stephen Weeks wrote:
> > Ah yes, you should consider using a regular versioning scheme.
> > As it stands now, the package name using offical Fedora rules
> > is this: mlton-0.0-0.fdr.1.20030716, and it is quite ugly.
> 
> Looking at 
> 	
> 	http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/developers-guide/s1-rpm-guidelines.html
> 
> I don't see why we can't use mlton-20030716-1.i386.rpm, just as we do
> now.  Is there some other spec you're looking at, in particular,
> something that rules out 20030716 as a version number?
One reason is, that if you decide to jump to x.y numbering,
comparison breaks, see
http://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=840

-- 
Gérard Milmeister
Tannenrauchstrasse 35
8038 Zürich
gemi@bluewin.ch