Re: Intermediate texlive-base release?
Norbert Preining <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi all!
> Now that we have updated packages of pgf, beamer, xcolor in Debian I am
> thinking about doing an intermediate texlive-base release.
> So I wanted to ask you opinion on this:
> texlive-base (2005.dfsg.2-2~int1) unstable; urgency=medium
> * blacklist beamer, xcolor, pgf and depend on the respective Debian packages
> * intermediate release to get better dependency chains
> * urgency set to medium as this package will override the one in
> unstable and for the testing transition these two revision fix RC bugs.
You don't need to set the urgency to medium. If you uploaded version n
with urgency medium and upload a version >n after that, but before n got
into testing, the newer version will inherit the urgency.
> - I would like to keep the debian release generally in sync. Is it ok
> to make intermediate releases like this with a version number
This will confuse everybody who doesn't know why you do that. And
frankly, I don't believe that in the long run we'll be able to keep
everything in sync. Just look at the teTeX packages, both in etch and
sarge: tetex-base always had new tarballs because of some non-free
files, whereas tetex-bin never needed that. Furthermore, there were
weeks and months without an upload of tetex-bin, but many of
IMHO, we should just use -2 and let them diverge.
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)