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

Re: r3715 - in trunk/src/debian-edu-config: debian testsuite



Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1Author: pere
> Date: 2005-06-07 21:55:59 +0000 (Tue, 07 Jun 2005)
> New Revision: 3715
> 
> Modified:
>    trunk/src/debian-edu-config/debian/changelog
>    trunk/src/debian-edu-config/testsuite/webcache
> Log:
>   * Petter Reinholdtsen
>     - Fix typo in testsuite/webcache, using correct argument to find.
> 
> Modified: trunk/src/debian-edu-config/debian/changelog
> ===================================================================
> --- trunk/src/debian-edu-config/debian/changelog	2005-06-07 20:44:28 UTC (rev 3714)
> +++ trunk/src/debian-edu-config/debian/changelog	2005-06-07 21:55:59 UTC (rev 3715)
> @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
> +debian-edu-config (0.399) UNRELEASED; urgency=low

Are this one intended to be released upstream as is, or is there another
reason for not using the <last-released>+svn<svn-revisionnumber> version
for this. That way it's much easier to identify which version that are
intended for testing purposes, and which version is intended for release
through Debian.

I guess this hasn't been discussed, but after having experienced almost
beeing blocked from the Debian BTS (at least threthened to be) for
bugging a Debian package built and maintained by a Debian maintainer,
not released to debian, but only to debian-edu, and with no sign of
beeing a development version; i think we need something that identifies
that this is clearly a development/cvs/svn-version.

(In this case I guess I should have known that it wasn't released to
debian, but it could have been someone else less knowledgable about
release process of debian-packages than me)

-- 
Finn-Arne Johansen
faj@bzz.no http://bzz.no/
Leverandør av support på, drift og videreutvikling av Skolelinux-løsninger



Reply to: