[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

(fwd) Proposed MBF: Debian upstream version higher than watch file-reported upstream version [atomo64@gmail.com]


And again some qa efford, which effects some if our packages.

My comments are below.

----- Forwarded message from Raphael Geissert <atomo64@gmail.com> -----

From: Raphael Geissert <atomo64@gmail.com>
Subject: Proposed MBF: Debian upstream version higher than watch file-reported upstream version
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:41:34 -0600

Hello all,

[Please respect the Reply-To header]

In order to bring some more QA on the watch files subject I'd like to start a 
permanent MBF on packages whose Debian upstream version (the version string 
from Version: without the epoch and the Debian revision) is higher than the 
latest upstream version found thanks to their watch file.

Rationale: the watch files are meant to keep track of upstream and if there's 
a newer version not being reported by the watch file it means that it needs 
to be fixed. 

Please note that this situation often occurs when the maintainer didn't make 
the watch file strip some +VCSrevNNNNN that was added to the Debian Version. 

If nobody objects I'll start filling (in an automated way since there are no 
false positives) reports on the 307 source packages which report a Debian 
upstream version higher than Upstream version by the watch file.

I'm attaching a list of these packages so I give some time for maintainers to 
fix the watch files before this MBF is accepted (!objected) and the automated 
MBF script is written.

All the reports will be available at[1].

Any kind of feedback is, as usually, welcomed.


Kind regards,
Atomo64 - Raphael

Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Content-Description: dd-list output of the affected packages

Debian Games Team <pkg-games-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org>

----- End forwarded message -----

  - fixed in svn on 2007-11-11, not uploaded
  - Has some other improvements in packaging, perhaps 8.3-2 should be

  - Some kind of snapshot packaged, perhaps that should go to our
    versioning, too?

  - I'm confused by that; we have a version 4.4.902, which isn't listed
    on upstreams homepage; and our version number doesn't sound like a
    Did the upstream homepage moved / got restructured?  Is the
    watch-file still correct?

  - svn snapshot packaged -> ignore

  - Broken watchfile, fixed in svn

  - Upstream seems to have restructured the download area, watchfile
    needs to be fixed

Yours sincerely,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: