Manoj Srivastava wrote: > At least we agree about new packages ;-) About older packages, > I am not sure. I think a single epoch, followed by sane dates, would > not really confuse people, and limit things to just one epoch, and > that having consistent date-formatted names is a big enough win.
Note that my version of the proposal has the same effect of a single epoch (maybe, it won't always be necessary), followed by sane dates, it's just pushed off into the future as long as possible. I am *not* advocating never changing and incrimenting the epoch each release. I just want to make sure we're clear on what I'm proposing. -- see shy jo
