Re: gcc 3.2 epoch?
Colin Watson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Read the changelog:
> * Increase epoch due to wrong gpc and chill default version (closes: #163294).
I wish there was some less-severe form of epoch that could operate only
for a limited period of time, so that random mistakes don't end up
increasing the epoch forever.
For instance (this is just a random idea), if there was a `version suffix'
that, like epochs, displayed only the suffix part in the various UIs,
but sorts after the base version, then you could have version sequences like:
-version- -displayed as-
good version 2.4.12 2.4.12
version with horrible bug 2.5.34 2.5.34
downgrade to good version 2.5.34::2.4.12 2.4.12
new version with bug fixed 2.5.35 2.5.35
well I'm sure this has been discussed to death in the past... sorry :-x
Saa, shall we dance? (from a dance-class advertisement)