Dne 11. 03. 19 v 20:50 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a):
>>>>> "VO" == Vít Ondruch
<vondruch(a)redhat.com> writes:
VO> In this case, if DNF said something like "you have installed
VO> foo-1:1.0, but there is available foo-0:2.0" it would give me
VO> hint. From the start it would be annoying, but once we would reach
VO> the point 4, I would, at least, know that I should do distrosync or
VO> something.
Under the proposal I put forward:
1. No releases except for rawhide would ever be affected by this,
assuming that users upgrade using supported methods.
2. Rawhide users would need to do this exactly once per cycle, on an
announced date.
So maintainers would not be allowed to remove epoch, but there would be
some script/automation, which would remove epoch on demand, once per
release, in all packages? Interesting idea.
Anyway, I still believe DNF could report when there is package 0:2.0,
while there is also 1:1.0, because this change, if accepted, is going to
redefine the meaning of epoch anyway. Epoch would basically become some
temporary override no matter what is the precise process.
Vít
So you would know that you should do distrosync because that would be
announced.
- J<