Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> writes: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 09:20:36AM +0100, Rhonda D'Vine wrote: >> I am seeking your input on this topic whether you consider this a >> possible solution to address this, and if we should carry this out. >> >> Short table for suggested overview: >> >> Upload to | used version suffix >> -------------------------+----------------------- >> wheezy-backports | ~bpo70+1 >> wheezy-backports-sloppy | ~bpo7+1 >> jessie-backports | ~bpo8+1 >> >> If people consider this too much error prone, we can stick to >> continuing with ~bpo80 instead. Please let me know of your thoughts on >> this topic. > > You could as well change the requirements for the alphanumeric part to > make wheezy-backports-sloppy and jessie-backports version numbers sort > higher than wheezy-backports ones from the start; something like > > Upload to | used version suffix > ------------------------+----------------------- > wheezy-backports | ~bpo70+1 > wheezy-backports-sloppy | ~deb7+1 > jessie-backports | ~deb8+1 > > Could that create confusion with security uploads? I think this will cause a lot of confusion as the suffix does not indicate that this is a backport at all. I don't see a need for the wheezy-backports-sloppy suffix sorting higher than the wheezy-backports suffix. Uploads to -sloppy will always have a higher version number in the part before the backport suffix, so this is not needed. If you are just changing something in the backport but keep it based on the same package you can still upload to wheezy-backports even if jessie is already released. Or am I missing something? Gaudenz
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature