Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ick. You'll be stuck with epochs forever. Gross. I'd rather only use > epochs to fix a mistake in packaging *or* a radical versioning change > from upstream. This isn't either of those cases.
Right. Though I'm not all that epoch-phobic, I'd rather not use them if I don't have to. > Rob> 2) Use 20.4-pre20.5-a-1 and no epochs > > This is much nicer. I'd use that, though I don't know what > you get by useing pre20.5-a versus pre20.5a. I just chose the former because it seemed a little less like it was implying that I was packaging a precursor to 20.5a, but rather a precursor to 20.5. However, I suppose that's not a particularly important distinction here. -- Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
