Thank you Julian for that complete summary. I can't think of any other questions or scenarios to ask about.
Regards, -- -- Grant Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [011128 16:06]: > (1) libdb: Shared library packages have the major version number in > their name; see policy 11.3. > > (2) Epochs are designed for when a mistake is made or the version > numbering scheme changes. Remember that epochs are often not > shown with the version number, so use them only when essential. > > (3) Kernel example: yes, you are right. > > (4) autoconf2.13/autoconf and other examples, such as fvwm1/fvwm: this > is only done in cases where the newer package differs so > significantly from the older package that the maintainer believes > that there is a real need for the old package to continue to > exist. In this case, the newer package usually supersedes the old > one, but the old one continues to be available if specifically > wanted. > > (5) apache (1.3)/apache2, in the past fvwm (1.x)/fvwm2. Here are > examples where the newer package is still in alpha or beta state > and not yet ready to be released into the wild. In this case, we > don't want people to be automatically upgraded, and so we name the > unstable package something different, so people only get the newer > package if they specifically request it. At a later stage, when > the newer version is more stable, they may rename the newer one to > the original name and provide a dummy transition package for > "brave" people.
