> I agree with the other comment to your post, obviously, but apart from > that: It's not necessarily about version numbers "like that", either. I > invented a rather far-fetched versioning scheme that obviously ought to > be replaced by something else just for the sake of the argument, but > there could equally well be a question of having to changing from one > versioning scheme that on its own may be seen as perfectly sane to a > different, equally sane one. And there is more than one; using > "<major>.<minor>.<patchlevel>" is not the only "right" way, I think. It > has some advantages, including the fact that everyone is familiar with > it, but I can think of some arguments against it, too, notably that what > exactly constitutes a major change and what is a minor one, is anybodys > guess, or rather, probably just a political decision. Personally I used > a date in the format "YYYYMMDD" for quite some time, but then I had to > change to that other convention after all... > > What I'm trying to say is just that Maximum RPM misses the point > somewhat when it talks about versioning schemes that require epoch > updates on every release, and concludes based on this that epoch is bad. > Yes, such versioning is bad, but the way I've always seen it, the > scenario in question was not the one the epoch mechanism was designed > for. I've assumed EPOCH is just intended as a "more major" version than > VERSION, i.e. a value you increment if, and only if, you change the > versioning scheme. > And as I mentioned ealier the decision to make such a change may indeed out of your controll. It could come from your companies marketing department, it could come from new versioning standards your engineering group decides to implement, or perhaps its just because a new versioning scheme you have decided embeds more usefull information in the version but it is not backwards compatible with the older versions. In these case epoch IMHO is a good thing (and I really don't understand why it is a bad thing, other than its not in the name of the rpm (like color...sigh)). Personally, I think of it as one of those tools you don't want to use unless you have to do so, but when you do it saves the day. Cheers...james > - Toralf > > _______________________________________________ > Rpm-list mailing list > Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list > _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
