Re: poll: package-specs and version numbers

[Jim Razmus <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

* Marc Espie <espie@xxxxxxxxx> [080714 09:46]:
> Current documentation says:
> 
> The version part starts at the first digit that follows a `-', and
> goes on up to the following `-', or to the end of the package name,
> if no flavor modifier is present.  It is highly recommended that
> all packages have a version number.
> 
> I'd like to modify that to make the version number *mandatory*.
> In the worst case, an artificial version of 0 would be okay.
> 
> The main reason for that is that the current fuzzy spec allows people
> to build packages with really weird names, and then they figure out later
> that they did it wrong.
> 
> With `stronger' specs guarantees, I can add more checks in the
> pkg_* code (for package names and for dependency specifications) that
> will give out more explicit diagnostics for wrong package names.
> 
> Any objections ?
> 

I like strong specifications.  Doesn't conflict with any porting I've
done, albeit I'm still pretty green.

Jim