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

Re: Version numbering for security uploads of native packages

Bas Wijnen <wijnen@debian.org> writes:

> Ok, that makes sense.  However, with +nmu1, there still is the problem
> of how to name security uploads.  With +s1, they sort after +nmu1, which
> I think is wrong.

There's no reason why we have to stick to one suffix.  +s1+nmu1 for an NMU
after a security upload is ugly but functional, and the next maintainer
release would reset all the suffixes anyway.  Likewise with appending
another +bN for a binary NMU.  As near as I can tell, since you would
never base an NMU or security update on a binary NMU, the worst case is
+s1+nmu1+b1, which isn't really that horrible.

> Turning "debian" into "deb" and "testing" into "+" would make it better
> "1.7.5+nmu3+deb3.1+.1" is comparable in length to the current
> "1.7.5+nmu3+lenny1"

If you go this route, please make it +deb31, not +deb3.1.  The extra dot
is historically special and indicates a binNMU.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: