The meta information of a package can change (e.a. improve the description or update the dependencies or conflicts).
In ER2 the build number is increased by every meta information change.
Maybe a versioning of the meta information is the better way, the client can ask the repository (have you new informations for me) and the repository can send only the required meta informations (the XML file).
My idea, extend the version number with mX, m stands for meta and X is an incrementing number. For example
acme-1.2.3-m3
Because the build number is everytime the last number, the suffix -m3 can be added. The information m3 is only the information about the meta information, this extension was installed with. Changes of the meta version will cause revalidating, but not update the extension if not necessary.
This prevent the update process on every meta information change.
The meta information of a package can change (e.a. improve the description or update the dependencies or conflicts). In ER2 the build number is increased by every meta information change. Maybe a versioning of the meta information is the better way, the client can ask the repository (have you new informations for me) and the repository can send only the required meta informations (the XML file).
My idea, extend the version number with mX, m stands for meta and X is an incrementing number. For example acme-1.2.3-m3 Because the build number is everytime the last number, the suffix -m3 can be added. The information m3 is only the information about the meta information, this extension was installed with. Changes of the meta version will cause revalidating, but not update the extension if not necessary. This prevent the update process on every meta information change.