Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R
Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Montag, 1. April 2013, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> Rather than accept the harm, surely the release team could simply roll
>> back the upload in some manner?
> As I understand it, only by introducing an epoch in the package version.
Or by using the 9.0.0+really0.99-1 version convention, which IMHO for
is way better for cases of temporary backtracking like this.
But in this particular case, leaving it alone in unstable would be
better still. The release is not that far away, and it is not
impossible to maintain packages in testing even when the package in
sid has moved on.