Re: To epoch or not to epoch?
Wouter Verhelst <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Fri, May 07, 2004 at 10:05:20AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
>> I've seen references to aversion of epochs in this list in the past,
> With no technical reason, only emotional ones.
>> and so I was wondering what's best to do?
> Technically, the best thing to do is to use an epoch, since, hey, this
> is _exactly_ the kind of thing it was invented for.
> The reason those people dislike epochs seems to be one of "It's ugly",
> "It'll be something you'll have hanging on your package forever", and
> similar things. I, however, think that having a package who's "upstream"
> version differs from the real upstream is far more ugly than having an
> epoch which is hidden from the user in most situations.
If its a problem with the upstream version not being sorted the debian
way you will get a new epoch for every upstream release. So you kind
of end up with having the epoch as real version and upstream version
as subversion. Thats ugly.
I would rather try to convince upstream to follow the debian
versioning way then since thats quite sane. But thats just me.