[Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#750623: Bug#750623: What is the hold-up of uploadin new package
- Subject: [Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#750623: Bug#750623: What is the hold-up of uploadin new package
- From: osamu_aoki_home@nifty.com (Osamu Aoki)
- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 21:32:58 +0900
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20140701123258.GA746@goofy>
- In-reply-to: <CAEwKtzi-DZ+toPO=Ye8dAHf0zEO=R2jw-V0BkG39nL7u6i_HWA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <20140622160149.GA19596@gmail.com> <20140623120322.GA17406@goofy> <CAEwKtzgpNKjy7z-Y2CAWaAihC8AmOf8Np3dvLopyyZ3t6Hs2dA@mail.gmail.com> <20140629123224.GA13410@goofy> <CAEwKtzisk06hnGXC9Pgrhu369iqJX6Enfo=53brG4Xexr9Nscw@mail.gmail.com> <20140629161117.GA16566@goofy> <CAEwKtzikpApjypFay8DAnDLtATeTJ4SxY1sxFWbfcLUxu+81Lg@mail.gmail.com> <CAEwKtzghH6UEPTVQDBaORjNJc-CojjA+VPSHjsDnXcKmJGFBig@mail.gmail.com> <20140630125420.GA4241@goofy> <CAEwKtzi-DZ+toPO=Ye8dAHf0zEO=R2jw-V0BkG39nL7u6i_HWA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi, (This is not a bug report. Move to ML only)
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:42:48PM -0400, Guo Yixuan wrote:
> > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748465
> >
> > Did you try the solution at the bottom?
>
> Do you mean message #42? I can't find any solutions there...
> I think a lintian override is the best solution before the removal
> of debian-watch-file-should-dversionmangle-not-uversionmangle.
>
> [1 #42] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748465#42
I was looking at 41. Same thing.
Yes, use lintian-override ! lintian is a helper but not the rule :-)
By the way, I accepted use of versioned -dev since you explained your
rationale. If this is my package, I would not use the versioned -dev to
make thing complicated without the real merit.
I do agree to use the versioned -dev when these 2 -dev package are made
to be co-installable and useful in such shape. This happens with major
libraries. For this, it require us to do more than bumping number in
-dev package name. See example:
http://ometer.com/parallel.html
(HP used to work at R-H and used to be with Debian as I understand)
Osamu
Reply to: