[elrepo-devel] Announcement: Updated kmod-atl1e testing release (Version 1.0.0.11)

[Phil Perry]

Alan Bartlett wrote:
> On 10 April 2010 17:08, Alan Bartlett <ajb at elrepo.org> wrote:
>> On 10 April 2010 17:00, Phil Perry <phil at elrepo.org> wrote:
>>> Would this be a case that might warrant use of an epoch?
>> Yes, I thought long and hard about it, but decided against using one.  ;-)
> 
> My response, above, does not deny any interested parties in attempting
> to twist my arm / tweak the black cat's tail to prompt me to change my
> mind . . .
> 
> If we were to use an epoch, should it be 0 or 1?
> 

It should be 1, I believe.

Epoch: 1

IMHO because this package is intended to update/replace a "newer" 
version already in the main repo, either we should increment the epoch 
or rename the package to something else and Obsolete the old package.


Also, if I understand the intention correctly - that this new atl1e 
package also replaces atl1c (??) - we should probably also consider 
adding an Obsoletes: so current users of atl1c are automatically 
migrated to the new atl1e driver?

Obsoletes: kmod-atl1c

Or rather that should probably be:

Obsoletes: atl1c-kmod

courtesy of the virtual provides.

Not attempting to twist any arms, just offering for discussion :)