Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>

    > On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 02:25:22PM -0800, Tom Lord wrote:
    > > For upwards compatability, this would have to remain an arch
    > > package-version name:

    > >         emacs--21.3             # is a version with empty branch name

    > > but this change would make the following a new valid package-*branch*
    > > name:

    > >         emacs--21.3a            # is a branch with no version id

    > > Is the inevitable resulting user confusion really worth it?

    > I suspect the number of people that use empty branch names is
    > very small anyway though.

    > Anyway, in what circumstances does it actually make a difference
    > in use?

e.g.:

make-branch and make-version; everything that accepts a `limit'
procedure.

-t