Hi Yaakov,
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 6:47 PM Yaakov Selkowitz <yselkowi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Since the previous libgweather versions were 40.y and the new versions
are 4.4.z, shouldn't there be an Epoch?
I was thinking about this hard as well and I managed to convince myself that it should be fine without an epoch, for two reasons:
1) The libgweather package was last part of the F38 package set, and has been retired ever since (in F39+). Because of that, new F39 installs don't have the package, and people who have updated from F38 to either F39 or current rawhide (F40) don't have the package either (it was obsoleted in fedora-obsolete-packages).
2) This only leaves people who would do F38->F40 distro upgrade in the future, but I think this case should be fine as well because AFAIK both dnf and PackageKit use distro-sync for distro upgrades, so they handle downgrades just fine.
Normally this should have definitely warranted an epoch, but because it was retired for a long time, I believe it should be fine without. We can also always add an epoch in the future if it turns out we missed some case.
What do you think?
> I expect this only affects places where the package name is hardcoded
> -
> CentOS 10 package sync comes to mind. I've added obsoletes and
> provides for
> all its subpackages so it should be transparent otherwise.
Please file a PR for content-resolver-input.
Thanks, done:
--
Kalev
-- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
