On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 18:39 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 11:05 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Reindl Harald wrote: > > > yes it is a hack but better than fake version numbers to > > > satisfy RPM and that is *the* reason epoch exists at all > > > > +1 > > > > That Ubuntu-style apples-101.reallyoranges versioning is misleading and > > against Fedora packaging guidelines. > > Yeah, I'd agree with Harald and Kevin in this case: 1.0-0.2.999 is a > horrible version string, I wouldn't have recommended it even if it had > been possible. This kind of situation really is the one in which it *is* > correct to use Epoch - when upstream versioning goes backwards, and > upstream cannot change it. I'd see it as a temporary thing until 1.0 does come out (whereas Epoch changes are forever), but I can totally see your point, and, upon further reflection, I think you (and Kevin and Reindl) are probably right. Jonathan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
