Re: Bumping epoch and reusing package name "elisa"
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 17:32:43 +0100
- From: Chris Lamb <lamby@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bumping epoch and reusing package name "elisa"
> +1 from me. Epochs are not only painful for maintainers, they are
> confusing for users too.
Completely agree with this.
As an curiosa-like aside, I once deliberately bumped an epoch in order
to be *less* confusing to users.
The somewhat unique background and confluence of events was that
upstream were shipping both 4.x & 5.x versions for some time whilst
the Debian epoch was at 4: for each.
This was resulting in demonstrable and user-evidenced confusion around
versions such as `4:5.0~rc4-3`. Truth be told, I was conflating the
various branches too due to the common suffix (combined with the noise
of the regular Debian suffix). I thus therefore "unnecessarily" bumped
the epoch to 5: for the 5.x series.
I'm not sure I would do this again mind you and I'm loathed to mention
it just in case it sets precedent. (Just don't tell anyone, ok?)
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` lamby@xxxxxxxxxx / chris-lamb.co.uk