Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> While I don't like epochs, there is nothing intrinsically
> wrong with an epoch bump when a packager
> determines that they need to downgrade because
> the testing for the upgrade was insufficient or
> inadequately performed and the packager found
> that there was no way forward with fixes to the
> new versions (either from upstream, or by the
> packager).
There are plenty of valid reasons to bump an Epoch. IMHO, reverting a
Rawhide-only version bump that never made it to a stable release is not. I
do not see why it cannot just be reverted.
Actually, the downgrade masquerading as an "upgrade" (due to the Epoch) only
makes it more likely that any issues related to the downgrade (such as the
ones the other Kevin, Kevin Fenzi, pointed out) will catch the user by
surprise. If the distro-sync (which should be the default way to do updates
at least on Rawhide, if not everywhere) mentions a package being downgraded,
that is much more likely to be noticed.
Kevin Kofler
--
_______________________________________________
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
