-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 11:26:38AM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote: > No it's not. Version number indicate a progression of an application, > they have no indication of "major differences between two releases".
If version numbers don't describe precisely that, what does? > Just because a package moves from 1.x to 2.x or 3.x gives no indication > of any major changes. They are just version numbers. Actually, when the major number changes, that's generally an indication that something big has changed. The Debian packaging system only understands progress and not necissarily the ramifications of such. This could very easily be fixed and allow for multiple versions of the same package in a particular tree if the packaging tools would ask the user which version they meant, and whichever version the packager recommends using could be the default option. All this would take is adding a single, optional flag for "default version." [re: epochs to accomplish the same thing] > This could/would cause serious breakage with the existing package pool. > In short, not a good idea. Right. Epochs have a totally different usage altogether, to fix situations when the packager typoed a version number and committed it. - -- .''`. Baloo Ursidae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian admin and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+gE5JJ5vLSqVpK2kRAjnzAJ9p/FtIaJVdTLL2VbGPW3LWBF1Z3QCdGfv+ 9FpoAtj2RNCsAh7qDdUF4o4= =MXCu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
