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

[Miles Bader]

Aaron Bentley <address@hidden> writes:
> Actually, I'm not sure what the advantage of version numbers is: why
> not have tla--12pre--patch-1 and tla--1.2.3--patch-32 etc?  Does
> anyone feel strongly that version numbers are valuable in addition to
> branches.  And if they are valuable, must they be required?

Tom brought up the issue of null branch names (which I didn't even
realize were valid!) and that an ambiguity between a null version and a
null branch may potentially cause problems.  Maybe making `.' valid in
branch names, requiring branch names must start with a letter, and then
making versions optional would work?

[I'd just as soon have an even more flexible syntax, but at this point I
suppose backward compatibility (both interface and code) is a major
requirement.]

-Miles
-- 
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra.  Suddenly it flips over,
pinning you underneath.  At night the ice weasels come.  --Nietzsche