On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 11:52 -0600, Jima wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > Nils Philippsen <nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> What is the reasoning for needing to bump something else beside the
> >> epoch? As far as I'm concerned, epoch is the most significant part of
> >> the "combined version" of a package -- isn't that the case?
> >
> > The most basic example, if you just bump epoch and nothing else, the
> > resultant file name is no different than the previous file name. You
> > can't store the two builds in the same directory, and it's quite
> > confusing.
>
> More importantly, wouldn't the CVS tag be the same, too? That's a big
> show-stopper.
I'd rather buy Jesse's filename argument -- (CVS) tags can be changed,
as can tagging schemes.
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
