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
list:
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.
Regards,
Al
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index