On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 09:32:31AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:48 PM Jeremy Bicha wrote: > > So is it appropriate to bump an epoch in Debian to match an important > > downstream's epoch? > > An alternative might be for Launchpad to allow whitelisted downgrades > of source packages (dropping the epoch) (zero idea how feasible that > is) and then a dpkg-vendor conditional in debian/rules to re-add the > epoch to the binary packages when they are being built for Ubuntu.
Launchpad doesn't need any changes here. It's perfectly possible to get Launchpad to accept a downgrade: while it won't accept it via the normal upload path, Ubuntu archive admins can do it by way of a delete followed by a copy. Doing so for binary packages would be contrary to Ubuntu archive policy for the obvious reason that apt clients would then be stranded on an old version that compares greater than all current versions. Doing so for source packages would be unconventional but could be discussed. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org]
