Michael Stone <mst...@debian.org> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 01:38:53PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> Another way to think of it is that the epoch should really be evaluated
>>> as part of the package name rather than the version string--it's
>>> basically a mechanism to avoid renaming a package for purely aesthetic
>> Well, it also has the function of getting rid of the old package and
>> being part of the normal upgrade path. The latter is important. If
>> the previous version had major data loss or security issues,
>> introducing a new package with a different name doesn't have the
>> semantics you want.
> Well, epochs don't magically do that either. :)
They certainly do? Or I'm missing your point. (To be clear, by "get rid
of the old package" I mean "from the active Debian archive," not from
everywhere it was ever installed.)
> What I can't think of is cases where it wouldn't work to have a new
> package plus a transition/cleanup package.
Yes, true, that also works.
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>