On 2026-01-01 Sean Whitton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andreas Metzler [01/Jan 12:02pm +01] wrote:
> > I think an epoch is the correct way to do this.
> Only if you *must* use an epoch. If it can be done without one, it
> should be.
We use epochs when they are the best solution, not when we "must". They
can always be avoided ("5000000+really+1.0").
My advise was for the exact case in question. The package goes from
20251215-1 to 1.0. That is exactly what we have epochs for:
| Note that the purpose of epochs is to cope with situations where the
| upstream version numbering scheme changes [...]
FWIW I have also just doublechecked that we are fine regarding "3.2.2.
Uniqueness of version numbers", gnulib package versions went from
0.0.20060601+dfsg-2 to 20060701+dfsg-1 and never used 1.0.
cu Andreas
--
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
