Le mardi 13 janvier 2009 à 14:16 -0500, Tom Lane a écrit :
The very fine fine print of
appears to allow "6b" as a version number under the guise of
"post-release packages", so we don't need to have a war about libjpeg in
particular. But the whole thing reads to me like an exercise in wishful
thinking. It's describing somebody's idea of what version numbering
ought to be like, not what upstreams actually use in practice.
It's describing version numbering that people undestand and that will
work in rpm.
What's wishful thinking is to think you can drop just any versionning
convention in rpm and it will magically process it.
Before this convention was written we had many cases of packagers with
the same attitude as you that blindly dropped upstream versions in rpm
and where surprised when they upgrade paths didn't work. You can see the
traces to this day in packages with insane epoch numbers used to
workaround broken versionning.