Petr Pisar ppisar at redhat.com
Thu Jan 26 08:34:53 UTC 2012

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:09:14PM +0100, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> I was going to update perl-opts from 0.042 to 0.05 when I realized that rpm
> was going to give me a hard time over the version number (0.042 > 0.05).
> Choices are:
> - Introduce Epoch in the rpm
> - Use 0.050 as the version number
> - Wait until upstream introduces a 0.05x version
> The third option isn't viable, imho. Is there a consensus in perl-sig
> on which one of the first two methods should be used?
I don't think there is a consensus. Unfortunatelly both approaches require to
check reverse dependencies and be aware of it when introducing new dependency.
I prefer augmenting version.

I'd like to convert all fractional versions to version object string in the
future. Of course with automated support from RPM dependency generator, cpan
spec etc. The version object strings are compatible with RPM versions.

-- Petr
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 230 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/perl-devel/attachments/20120126/10b7c1af/attachment.sig>

More information about the perl-devel mailing list