Matthias Saou wrote: > Oliver Falk wrote : > > > That's what Epoch was made for. > > > > OK, so I'll use Epoch for this (well, allready did :-) ). > > Argh. Please try to not introduce any unnecessary initial > epochs into Fedora Extras packages! Don't be afraid, I'm not goin' to do that! > > > The ideal solution would be > > > if the previous package had been 0.84-1-rc2, then the new package > > > could be 0.84-2. Oh well. > > > > I'll remind myself about this as soon as I have 0.85 rc1 or > > somethin' like that. :-) > > It's all explained here : > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines Arg. Seems I missed that section :-( > Obviously, one could consider "it's too late", but if the > package with version "0.84rc2" wasn't too widespread, I'd > really suggest you don't use epoch and live with the minor > breakage that the non-upgradability (until > 0.85 something is released, that is) will cause. It was a local package, that was never commited to Extras, as I had no time to do that and it's only needed at my local box (currently). > And yes, I'm saying that because "0.82rc2" for version is > contrary to the guidelines, No I know! > and because *I*'m your sponsor for Extras ;-) Thanks a lot for have an eye on me :-) Best, Oliver
