Re: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...
On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Jules Bean wrote:
> Someone suggested this earlier in the discussion, and someone else pointed
> out that this is clearly against policy, since anything after the '-' should
> reflect debian-specific packaging changes, not upstream changes.
Then I would argue that the policy statement is self contradictory. The -0
and -1 suffixes create (and declare) those releases to be source change
releases, which are, obviously, upstream changes.
This is how they are being used in this case, with the additional
If we simplify it to 2.0.8-0.1 then it should conform to your idea of
policy better, but it doesn't convey as much information as the other form
and it would make them look like non-maintainer releases.
If policy must insist on leaving no "wiggle" room here, then my only
recourse is to not release "pre-release" versions. I don't think that
is a good idea, as it wastes our testing manpower, and weakens the final
Manoj has already cc'd the suggestion to the policy list (Thanks Manoj!)
so if you guys will haggle out something useful, that would be wonderful.
>From some other comments I have heard it seems that the list should first
figure out how to maintain the document so we can all gain from the work
you are doing. A committee to "maintain" the package would be fine, but
that suggests another policy change ;-)
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: email@example.com Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com