On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:00:58PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 09:51:14PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > > As Jonas said, an epoch cannot be undone, +really can, regardless when > > > this is going to happen. > > > > I think ignoring when it happens is not the right way to see it. Even if we > > assume that > > upstream is going to work on this with the same effort, we will still end > > up waiting > > for a _decade_ for the +really to go away. > > > > Is tagging this along for so many years really is more worthy than an epoch? > > Note that the package might even go stale in such a long time, thought. > > BTW, Jonas also said, "is it unlikely that they will reach 22 > in the foreseeable future?"
Did you consider asking them to advance to 22+ with their next release? Afterall, I read it that way that it that there was some issue with that 22 version, and they might have also interest in putting that into the past? -- tobi
