On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:23:22 +0100, Xavier Chantry <chantry.xavier@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
Well, of course a new separator is not necessary, packager can do everything with '.', e.g. he can use "1.0.6.2a-2". It is just more readable to the user (and the packager). The key here is that epoch is no more than a simple version prefix, and I think it is needless to introduce %EPOCH% database field etc.
Because this is ugly as hell and it will result in 100+ bug reports and "why is the version number off" questions in the first year. KISS applies both ways- keep the code simple, but keep developers lives from becoming enveloped in the first level of hell, and this suggestion would unfortunately do that. :/
I don't know if this was already discussed or even implemented, but is the epoch value taken into account when resolving dependencies? I am asking because I couldn't update from openssl 1.0.0 to 1.0.0a using the force switch as this broke all deps like >1.0.0. Greetings, Pierre -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre