Re: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...
> I'm still really vague on what REAL technical objection has been raised to
> actually using (oh, horror!) epochs. Yes, it will remain in the version
> number "forever". So what? Who cares? If the epoch reaches 50, who is
> going to notice and care? The reason we use the upstream version numbers is
> for recognition. If they don't fit, we use epochs and be done with it. The
> version numbers are recognisable in the filenames, and dpkg knows which
> comes first. I see that as a good thing.
While I've got no objection to epoch's I do object to their premeditated
misuse, which I believe is what you are suggesting.
I don't think people should adopt a policy of using a ``pre'' version, with
the intent of using an epoch when th final release comes out, since there are
several ways of avoiding this (the 2.0.7.99.1-1 one being my current favorite)
But in the case of lic6, just past, I think an epoch would have been the right
thing to do, because it would have painlessly, and effortlessly got us out of
the pickle we'd gotten into.
The ``put the painful bit after the dash in the debian version'' suggestion is
no good I'm afraid, because the orig.tar.gz ends up giving the impression that
Debian has the release version already, whereas it's just the pre-release
version with a bogus name.
Cheers, Phil.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: