[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: epoch fix?

+++ Jonathan Nieder [2013-05-07 16:14 -0700]:

> It makes sense for Debian, too.  Epochs were invented to handle
> changes to the version numbering *scheme*.  They work well for that.

This is true. It would be good advice somewhere to sugest that if
using a date-based packaging scheme, to prefix it with 0. i.e

I packaged something a while back that had no scheme so used a date
string: 20110812 as this was suggested somewhere. Now they have done a
release and called it 0.6, I realise that 20110812 (20 million) is a 
lot bigger than 0.6, or indeed any other likely version number. epoch
time :-( Not a big deal but could so easily have been avoided. 

Now I just need to find that original packaging advice and add this
little gem of knowledge.

> The "really" trick works better for temporary decreases in version
> number, and the conspicuousness is actually a good thing imho.
> Hope that helps,

It does, thank you. I had not properly understood the above before. 

Principal hats:  Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM

Reply to: