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

[Rainer Müller]

On 2013-01-05 23:04, Blair Zajac wrote:
> On 01/05/2013 01:32 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>> I guess munki uses the version number from in the metadata of the pkg
>> and not from the filename, so we could avoid putting epoch 0 in the
>> filename (to keep them short), but still keep the epoch and version in
>> the metadata.
> 
> I argue that consistency is more important here.  People are making
> packages for a reason, so keeping the epoch number there doesn't need to
> be hidden.  But I don't feel that strongly about it.

We hide the epoch information from users in other places. As said
earlier, the filenames of archives do not include the epoch. More
important, it is also not part of the default 'port info' output.

>> Also, what about a different separator for the epoch to avoid confusion?
>> Writing the example above as foo-1_3.2.0_0.pkg would be easier for
>> recognition by humans.
> 
> In the work I committed, the .pkg and .mpkg filenames do use _ as a
> separator, so it would look like foo-1_3.2.0_0.pkg.

I have to apologize I did not check the actual code and only followed
the example on the list...

Rainer