Re: gcc 3.2 epoch?

[Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp>]

Brian May <bam@debian.org> writes:
> *if* *I* started a new system from scratch, I
> would have 2 entities for each source/binary package:
> 
> - Debian package version, based entirely on the Debian revision, and
>   not based on the upstream version
> 
> - upstream package version, stored as an attribute within the package
>
> - Reduces or eliminates the need for epochs.

Actually all you've done is made epochs mandatory...

The thing is that it's _nice_ to have the debian version number related
to the upstream version number, it makes things seem more concrete and
less arbitrary.

I don't even really mind epochs if they're used when sparingly, it's the
[apparently] increasing casual use of them that grates on my nerves;
it's sort of like your programmer's spider-sense tingling when you see
duplicated code all over the place.

-Miles
-- 
P.S.  All information contained in the above letter is false,
      for reasons of military security.