Hi Sean, On 2020-09-29 02:22, Sean Whitton wrote: > Technically superfluous but I think helpful to the reader, so I suggest > we just keep it.
To be honest, as a reader, I found that to be the opposite. The "If [epoch] is omitted" makes it sound as if there were an alternative handling if it's not omitted. So the text If it is omitted then the upstream_version may not contain any colons actually means The upstream_version may not contain any colons It gets slightly more confusing when one considers dashes: upstream_revision may have a dash if a revision exists. But upstream_revision may not have a colon regardless of whether an epoch is present or not; so the "If [epoch] is omitted" seems really odd. Anyway, just my thoughts. Perhaps I read too much into it.
