[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-devel
Subject:    Re: Debian part of a version number when epoch is bumped
From:       Vincent Bernat <bernat () debian ! org>
Date:       2018-02-14 12:57:16
Message-ID: 87eflnybir.fsf () luffy ! cx
[Download RAW message or body]


 ❦ 14 février 2018 12:53 +0100, Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org>  :

>> > Would it hurt to take those epoch bumps into Debian?
>> 
>> Depends on what you mean by hurt. I see epochs being used w/o much
>> tought or care, on many situations where they are not supposed to be
>> used, and they are permanent stigmas.
>
> I wonder where this representation of "epoch" as a "stigma" comes from.
> They're a part of a version number. They're as much a stigma as the "57"
> in "libavcodec57". What's the big deal? Just use it if you need to, and
> be done with it.
>
> There's really really really nothing wrong with using an epoch. If some
> of our (or someone else's) infrastructure has issues dealing with them,
> then that's a bug in the infrastructure and we should fix it. But nobody
> should be afraid of using an epoch when the upstream version number
> changes incompatibly, because *that's what they're for*.

It's not only an infrastructure problem. If you Depends on X (>= 1.8),
this will be true with X 1:1.6 as well.
-- 
Use the fundamental control flow constructs.
            - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]