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

Re: versions / suffixes in experimental



Re: Adam D. Barratt 2014-09-25 <[🔎] 3653b875c93fd474b8b354b4c76f4adb@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
> On 2014-09-25 8:16, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >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?
> 
> No. Under no circumstances should version numbers be reused. (There's some
> disagreement about cases such as reintroducing old packages that aren't even
> in oldstable any more, but a contemporaneous upload to multiple suites using
> the same version number is absolutely wrong.)

We recently reintroduced cl-interpol 0.2.1-1 to sid, after the package
was removed in 2009. There were still around half a dozen
installations reported on popcon, but the worse part is that this made
the UDD changes importer explode with a unique key violation. I think
they fixed it by deleting this upload from UDD, and we quickly
uploaded -2 to get the package also upgraded on the old systems out
there, but the bottom line should be "don't do that".

Christoph
-- 
cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: