Where to include port version in 'port pkg' output?

[Blair Zajac]

On 01/05/2013 02:12 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 5 Jan 2013, at 09:53 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:
>>
>> It seems unfortunate to make the epoch user-visible at all, since a handful of ports have large unsightly epochs. :/
>
> That might be so, but i don't see an alternative. Macports might itself treat the epoch and revision as different things to the package version, which of course they are, but third parties cannot really be expected to understand such nuances. In this case the pkg's created need a single version number I think, so the version constructed for them have to include the epoch and revision numbers, if the system is to properly support changes in them. I don't think this situation is that different to rpm/deb packages on Linux systems, which usually do something very similar, combining the native package version with other versionings.
>
> Using _ in the pkg version seems a good idea, as long as they are properly understood, by systems like munki for instance ?

Munki uses the interval version number in the .pkg or .mpkg, it doesn't 
care about the filename.  Given that, I would still rather see 
consistently named filenames.

Blair