Re: [NGO] external module properties

>>>>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:43:42 -0400, Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net> said:

>> I'd be tempted not to even define the required formatting of the version
>> number.  Simply say it must be sortable using a standard comparison
>> function (strcmp or >).

PS> Funny, but that's exactly what we did in YANG ;^)

Good start, but I'm going to take issues with only using a date.  And
YANG doesn't do what I said.  It specifies the revision number format as
a date.

PS> The revision statement looks like:

PS> revision 2007-06-09 {
PS>    description "Initial revision.";
PS> }

I wanted to be able to pick what was right for me, as an author, from
any of these (for only I know what is good from my authoring
perspective):

  revision 20070609 {

  revision 200706090001 {

  revision 42 {

As long as future > past, the tools should be happy.

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.
_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
NGO@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo