Am 14.02.2018 um 14:31 schrieb Jeremy Bicha: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Vincent Bernat <ber...@debian.org> wrote: >> ❦ 14 février 2018 12:53 +0100, Wouter Verhelst <wou...@debian.org> : >> >>>>> Would it hurt to take those epoch bumps into Debian? >>>> >>>> Depends on what you mean by hurt. I see epochs being used w/o much >>>> tought or care, on many situations where they are not supposed to be >>>> used, and they are permanent stigmas. >>> >>> I wonder where this representation of "epoch" as a "stigma" comes from. >>> They're a part of a version number. They're as much a stigma as the "57" >>> in "libavcodec57". What's the big deal? Just use it if you need to, and >>> be done with it. >>> >>> There's really really really nothing wrong with using an epoch. If some >>> of our (or someone else's) infrastructure has issues dealing with them, >>> then that's a bug in the infrastructure and we should fix it. But nobody >>> should be afraid of using an epoch when the upstream version number >>> changes incompatibly, because *that's what they're for*. >> >> It's not only an infrastructure problem. If you Depends on X (>= 1.8), >> this will be true with X 1:1.6 as well. > > In the particular case of gnome-calculator, virtually nothing depends > on a particular version of gnome-calculator. And in this case, it's > probably better for me to just go ahead and upload the epoch bump, > upsetting a few people, but it's not really a big deal at all and > saves a bunch of needless work in the long run.
I understand where you are coming from as Ubuntu maintainer, but I also share the opinion that packaging bugs should not be pushed upstream. If we allowed that for every downstream we'd have a big mess. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
