tech-pkg archive

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

Re: 2008Q1 -> current: downgrade

On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 10:37:24PM +0300, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
> First, your numbers (two, three and eight) are totally wrong. Second,
> I have already showed (in my previous emails) real life examples
> why PKG_EPOCH is helpful and
> in which cases.

And people have told you in previous emails that you are exaggerating;
why PKG_EPOCH is overkill, and how it can easily be worked around.

At the risk of boring the backside off the rest of the readers of this

        if the version number travels backwards (version number being
        dewey decimal, not numbers alphabetically-sorted), we will
        change the PKGBASE number.

        A worked example:  wibble-2.03 is in pkgsrc.  It gets taken
        over by a new maintainer, who changes the version number to
        1.0, to denote the new regime.  The new version in pkgsrc is
        given the name wibble1-1.0.

This is much less intrusive and annoying than having a separate
PKG_EPOCH value.


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index