Re: okteta

[David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost>]

On Sun, 20 Aug 2023 at 19:38, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 12:35:52PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > I think it's a simple matter of someone producing a patch for epoch.  I
> > am not aware of any real objections to doing this in a way with
> > semantics that match the other systems.
>
> That's not the reason. The reason we don't have epoch numbes is because
> the existing system handles the case well enough. There is just no
> generally agreed standard on what to use as magic high component number.

I would have to disagree there - the issue of an upstream version
reducing is rare, but we do not have any way to handle it, and have
this issue _every_ time.

The three other package systems all have effectively the ~same well
defined way to handle it - epoch is a small incrementing integer which
prefixes the other version information, and if omitted defaults to
sorting before any other value.

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_epoch_tag
https://developer.bigfix.com/relevance/reference/debian-package-version-epoch.html
https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/#makefile-naming-revepoch

Thanks

David