2008/12/22 Jason Corley <jason.cor...@gmail.com>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen <pkarl...@rpm5.org>
> wrote:
> > So WDYT?
>
> This seems like yet another magic bit in RPM comparisons with which to
> confuse newbies and old hats alike... Think of how many times you've
> explained epoch to someone on IRC, now add yet another factor to
> comparison operators. I'm sort of on the fence with the whole idea (I
> see you've already merged it) but it doesn't strike me as much
> different than just abusing the existing operators already in place (I
> could abuse epoch as distro identifier, tack more crap onto release,
> etc. etc.) but perhaps that's just me.
>
It's still completely optional and won't confuse anyone now using it..
The case is still that several linux distributions (ie. Fedora & Mandriva)
already (ab)use release tag for this, and it's also done in different
ways giving more confusion and less portability.
The need for an ability to treat a package built on different versions of a
distribution also as different package versions is certainly there, finding
a common and standard is in everyone's interest.. Worth pointing out
is that Panu also was positive towards this idea, so reaching consensus
between rpm5.org & rpm.org and standardize this seems possible. :)
I'm not sure if I explained distepoch good enough, but I guess I should
make it clear again that distepoch would be the least significant value
when doing comparision, not most significant such as epoch is.
This is why I'm a bit certain about whether using "distepoch" as a name
is the best or not..
IMO adding this new tag bring a lot less confusion and is way more
intuitive than Fedora's %{?dist} or Mandriva's %mkrel, and it's also
something that you won't have to pollute the spec file with (reducing
confusion and mess further)..
