Re: [NGO] external module properties

[Andy Bierman <ietf at andybierman.com>]

Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Phil Shafer <phil at juniper.net> wrote:
>> There's a lot to be gained by using dates and not a lot of down
>> side.  Being able to look at the revision history and see when what
>> happened, how stable a module is, and how likely folks are to be
>> up-to-date with the latest version is important.  And it avoids
>> tons of discussion about whether we need two or three decimal numbers
>> and when the major or minor version should change.  It's simple,
>> obvious, sortable, well-defined, and will last for thousands of
>> years.
> 
> I fully agree with this.
> 
> How about adding an optional counter after the date?  So you can do
> 
>   2008-04-29
>   2008-04-29:1
>   2008-04-29:2
> 
> and so on.
> 

I sort of prefer separate 'revision-date' and 'release-number' fields,
but you are trying to keep the compare limited to a single string,
which is better.

I also prefer to limit the characters in this string to 'URL-safe'
and 'filespec-safe' chars, e.g., 2008-04-29.1 and 2008-04-29.2

> It removes the arbitrary timing constraint that worries Wes, and it's
> still simple enough for the common use case.
> 
> 
> /martin

Andy

> 
>   
> _______________________________________________
> NGO mailing list
> NGO at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
NGO at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo