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

Re: versions / suffixes in experimental



On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09:16:46 +0200
Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro> wrote:

> 
> Is there any convention for version numbers in experimental?
> 
> E.g. when uploading to backports, we add a suffix like "A.B.C~bpo70+1"
> so that the system can cleanly upgrade to version A.B.C when upgrading
> to the next stable release.
> 
> I have a package, version 2.2.5-5 in unstable and testing
> 
> I uploaded 2.2.5-6 and 2.2.5-7 to experimental.  Should I have given
> them versions like 2.2.5-6~exp1 or something and then upload a proper
> 2.2.5-6 to unstable when I am happy with it?  Or should my next upload
> to unstable by 2.2.5-8?  Or do I just ignore the version numbers I
> uploaded to experimental and use 2.2.5-6 as the next version number
> for an unstable upload, even if it doesn't contain the same things as
> 2.2.5-6 in experimental?

2.2.5-8 would seem typical practice.

2.2.5-6 will not work for a new upload to unstable - it already exists in the archive.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: