Santiago Vila writes:
> If an upstream package has problematic version numbers they should be
> converted to a sane form for use in the Version field.
>
> ...which is what has not been done in this case.
The problem I have with epochs is that it will have to bump each time
a packages enters a "pre" period. I fell that's not very nice.
A solution would be to convert 2.0.7pre1 to 2.0.6.99.1. I think that
was done to keep 2.0.0pre* kernels in v1.3 dir.
But I do agree it would be nice to have a special syntax for version
numbers allowing to cope with {pre,alpha,beta}-like numbering. It is
perfectly sane to distinguish between "it's in testing stage" and
"it's released software", and we should IMHO support such a thing.
Anyone against that ?
--
Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
