.\vcpkg upgrade --no-dry-run

• Should the change in the new Port-Version field in the port's CONTROL file cause removal/rebuild of port and its features?

• Referenced: https://vcpkg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/maintainers/control-files/ paragraph Version does not mention specifically the new Port-Version field.

• I noticed in commit ef91134 the ports' CONTROL files have a Version and Port-Version having had the Port-Version incremented up by 1.

• I have several of these ports installed, libpq, libiconv, libarchive and the CONTROL and vcpkg-cmake-wrapper.cmake files were updated on my instances, 4 on windows, 2 on OpenSUSE Linux (One VM one WSL2) with a git pull but when doing a vcpkg upgrade on all the instances none of them were flagged as needing to be upgraded

• The response I received after a vcpkg upgrade --no-dry-run was All installed packages are up-to-date with local portfiles.

• I would think splitting the Port-Version from the Version, a change in either would cause the port to be flagged for removal/reinstallation by vcpkg upgrade as the Port-Version would seem to be now for changes made like adding features, fixes, documentation, etc to a current version, but signaling the port needs to be rebuilt?

• I also noticed the Port-Version no longer shows on the port when a vcpkg list or vcpkg search is performed, just the base version found on Version in the CONTROL file (see attached vcpkg-search.txt and vcpkg-list noting only base version is shown on libpg, libiconv and libarchive).

• See attached files for vcpkg list vcpkg search and ls -al of <vcpkg-root>\ports\libarchive showing CONTROL and vcpkg-cmake-wrapper.cmake files updated.
  ls-al.txt
  vcpkg-search.txt
  vcpkg-list.txt

• ac-130h@Andromeda:[~/git/vcpkg]
>$ vcpkg update
Using local portfile versions. To update the local portfiles, use git pull.
No packages need updating.

• Please advise further?

Thank you and have a wonderful holiday weekend :)