>>>>> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> writes: ZJ> This doesn't sound convincing at all. I was not attempting to be convincing. ZJ> We *know* that people miss announcements all the time. Dropping ZJ> epochs would introduce yet another case where a "magical" step is ZJ> needed at a specific time. Personally I don't see it as being excessive. Plus... if you're running rawhide you do already have to deal with this, when it's done accidentally. I believe a proposal to do it in a coordinated fashion actually helps the situation. ZJ> We need to remember that dropping epochs also impacts any package ZJ> which uses Requires/BuildRequires/Recommends/Conflicts/Obsoletes on ZJ> the package dropping the epoch. Yes, that was covered in previous discussion. ZJ> All those will require periodic rebuilds. The problem is that those ZJ> things don't necessarily follow the cadence of Fedora releases. Yes, all of these are confounded by epochs currently. I believe that after the epochs have been removed, the situation is actually better than it is now. ZJ> The proposal to drop epochs sounds like a step that is problematic and ZJ> causes extra work now and ongoing for third-party packagers. Personally I just don't see the problem. I'm not saying that it has nonzero cost, but I don't see it as being major. ZJ> And the problem that it solves is niche. The cost of the solution ZJ> doesn't seem justified. I wonder how the existing RPM-based distros which allow epochs to go away between releases handle this. Aren't we the last one that doesn't? - J< _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
