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

Re: debian package versioning and revisioning format

Bill Mitchell writes ("debian package versioning and revisioning format"):
> [...]
> Miquel's changes rely on dchanges knowing what extensions
> to expect (.deb, .tar.gz, .diff.gz, and no others), making
> it necessary to revise dchanges if these should ever change.
> That's necessary to disambiguate VER from EXT when either or
> both might contain '.' chars, without a '-' delimited REV field
> between them.

Huh ?

> Would it be possible to regularize debian package naming by
> requiring a '-' delimited REVISION number after the VERSION number
> (or, if it's conceptually more palatable, as a VERSION-suffix?)
> This seems a small burden to place on debian package maintainers.

No, I don't think this is a good idea.  In particular (a) upstream
versions have always been permitted to contain `-'s and (b) in
November we discussed and agreed to obsolete the separate Revision
field and this is now implemented in dpkg.

> Packages originated for the debian project and either not used
> outside of debian or never experiencing debian-specific revisions
> could simply arbitrarily set the REVISION number to 0 or 1.

IMO this would be confusing, and an abuse of the idea of a revision


Reply to: