On Fri, 2024-09-20 at 18:53 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > Hi > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Thu, 2024-06-13 at 20:48 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: [...] > > > > ## Proposal > > > > > > > > Stop merging back changes, but create version distinct branches. > > > > Something like that: > > > master: uploaded to experimental > > Call this debian/latest so we follow DEP-14 as far as possible. > > I'm a bit reluctant on the latest, but well. The rest of the world > agreed on main. I know, but this is the Debian way. > > > -> debian/release/6.6: uploaded to unstable and stable releases > > > -> debian/security/6.6.1+1: extra security releases > > I would prefer to use suite names in these branch names, to make > > itclearer what the branches correspond to. So those would be: > > - debian/6.6/unstable > > How do you think the transition to stable will happen? Just leave it > this way? > > I would prefer to directly use the release name, aka > "debian/6.6/trixie", because this is what the package is destined for. I think that's also OK. > That it is uploaded to unstable (or to (testing-)proposed-updates) is > part of the technical implementation, but it does not change our policy > for it (same version range etc, or did I miss some differences?). > > > - debian/6.6/bookworm-backports > > - debian/6.6.1+1/booxie-security [*] > > (swapping the release and suite so that they don't actually conflict > > with DEP-14 branch names). > > Okay. > > We can then also use "debian/6.6/experimental" or "debian/6.6/latest", > if necessary. When would we need those? Are you thinking about how we would switch upstream version in experimental during a freeze? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain. - Lily Tomlin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part