Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [BUG] feature plan -- downstream branches

[Aaron Bentley]

Matthew Dempsky wrote:

> ; might work, though it'd have to be escaped on the command line 
> (manually because you'll probably either want to complete foo--devo--1.0 
> or foo--devo;bug69--1.0) and we already get enough complaints about 
> =tagging-method and =build.

Please, not "&" or ";"!

In fact, is it a programmatic requirement to have it in the 
package-version?  For the described usage, I think it'd work fine to 
have it as a version variable.  (e.g. version-variable: upstream-name 
"tla--devo--1.3")

This has the potential advantage of supporting fully-qualified revision 
names.

Aaron

--
Aaron Bentley
Director of Technology
Panometrics, Inc.