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

Bug#248618: Section 3.2.1 encourages use of epochs



On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:54:46PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:39:59PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > What if you upload a new upstream, but it is too broken yet, and you
> > want to downgrade in Debian? You need an epoch. Or if you simply make a
> > mistake? Or a NMU uploads a new upstream version, or a broken version,
> > by mistake? It happens.
> 
> I would make it "newversion+oldversion". Similar things are done for alpha
> or prealpha packages, e.g. "1.2+1.3pre3".
> 
> > One only should take care to not choose a version system that will
> > require an epoch increase every time.
> 
> Well, if we can avoid it without any payload, why not do it?

The payload is obfuscated, hacked version numbers, newversion+oldversion
is very confusing, especially if the package isn't at all in
'newversion'. You sure must admit that 'newversion+oldversion' is a hack
around the version compare function...

Epoch is the solution for that.

--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
jeroen@wolffelaar.nl
http://jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl



Reply to: