[Roberto C. Sanchez] > Doesn't that also make backporting packages to Sarge (if they have ~ > in the version) a bit more dicey? Since apt in sarge supports this syntax, it shouldn't be a problem for clients. If your backports repository is using existing DAK code, or other software that doesn't cope, then yes, you'd have to fix that. Also, for the official archive, sarge-proposed-updates should never get any ~ versions anyway, since it should just get -sargeN increments of existing sarge version numbers.
Description: Digital signature