[suggest] Re: problem with perl-DateTime version numbers

Matthew Vale matthew.vale at tuxtel.net
Wed Mar 23 13:57:00 CET 2011


On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:31:31 +0100, Yury V. Zaytsev write:

> On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 07:26 -0400, Steve Huff wrote:
>
> > thanks for your report!  we need to pull that problematic RPM from the
> >  repository.
>
> Or, maybe, it is better to make it 0.5300-1, in the case if the author
> does it again? What do you think?

Talking with one of my colleagues here they mentioned that pulling the problematic RPM would only fix people whom don't have that version installed, anyone who had it installed already would still not automatically upgrade.

The two options would be
* force expansion of the version number to be 4 digits (this would help catch if the upstream does it again, as you suggested)
* increase the epoch number to make new versions take priority

Whichever is more convenient will do, as both would resolve the current situation

>  
> -- 
> Sincerely yours,
> Yury V. Zaytsev








More information about the users mailing list