epochs and the guide

[Chris Pickel]

On 11 Jan, 2008, at 22:22, markd at macports.org wrote:
>> That's actually a bit of a mess and might deserve its own topic of
>> discussion. For now, I think it should be stated that an epoch cannot
>> be removed; this is the only case in which we can currently guarantee
>> consistent behavior.
>>
>> At the same time, we should change MacPorts' behavior to be
>> consistent. I think the method from port(1) is better than the one
>> from macports.tcl, since it's the only one in which we can guarantee
>> upgrades correctly--even if it does force an extra line of cruft to
>> hang around in Portfiles with epochs (all 20 of 'em!)
>
> I changed the text to this based on what you said about current  
> behavior.
> Let me know if it needs adjusting.
>
> ----------
> An epoch is not needed for most ports. If an epoch is used it must  
> never
> be decreased or removed even when a port's version is updated; this  
> would
> cause port version comparisons to be incorrect since epochs take
> precedence over versions once epochs have been used.
> ----------

That sounds right for the current behavior. Maybe once others weigh in  
(or don't) we can have a consistent behavior to base the description  
off of, though.


Chris