On 2017-10-27 14:26, Achim Gratz wrote: > Ken Brown writes: >> A future version of setup might allow version numbers of the form >> e:v-r, where is an epoch. Currently setup doesn't parse these >> correctly when reading installed.db. In case ScanFindVisitor is used, >> there is an additional problem in reading filenames containing colons. >> The reading is done by Win32 functions, and the illegal characters >> like ':' aren't translated. > > I don't really think it's worth anybody's while to introduce support for > a feature (epochs) that everone else decided should not be used. Do we > really want to use epochs and what for?
On the contrary, I have argued that we *do* need epoch to deal with occasions where versions go backwards. I did however say that I wasn't keen on using them to work around CPAN's unique versioning issues, as it may inflate quickly in that particular scenario. -- Yaakov
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
