Re: 1.2 after 1.2pre
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 08:39:33PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 03:08:49AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > The upstream of zblast released 1.2 after he released 1.2pre.
> > The problem is that dpkg thinks 1.2 is older than 1.2pre.
> > So I asked him what I should do. He picked 1.2.1 for
> > the Debian package, saying "I very rarely use x.y.z
> > versions, and I've never used them for zblast."
> >
> > Did I do something wrong here? I don't think an epoch
> > is for such a case.
>
> AFAIK, it's exactly for that case.
I'd say the opposite, I think.
Note that the purpose of epochs is to allow us to leave behind
mistakes in version numbering, and to cope with situations where the
version numbering scheme changes. It is not intended to cope with
version numbers containing strings of letters which the package
management system cannot interpret (such as ALPHA or pre-), or with
silly orderings (the author of this manual has heard of a package
whose versions went 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1, 2.1, 2.2, 2 and so forth).
(policy chapter 4)
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: