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

Re: New version of beagle



Hi Dylan,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 04:54:59PM +0100, Dylan wrote:
> Yes, uscan reports a new version of beagle (27Jul16.86a) but it is not
> a true new version, it is the same version already in Debian
> (4.1~160727-86a+dfsg-1).
> Upstream uses a bad versioning scheme based on dates which "breaks"
> our system and seems not be interested in changing it by a more
> standard versioning scheme.
> So, I converted the version by something more standard (maybe not
> optimal, I understand).

I think your conversion makes some sense.  There would even be a
chance to uversionmangle

   s/Jan/01/;s/Feb/02/; ...
   s/(\d\d)(\d\d)(\d\d)/$3$2$1/

to get a sortable date out of this.  But before we start inventing
really crazy things in d/watch I wrote another e-mail to upstream (list
in CC).

> Maybe, I should disable the watch file using something like that [1]
> but the current watch file permits me to quickly/regularly check if
> new upstream version is released.

I'd really love to get watch files working and hope that upstream will
consider sane versions after a second mail.  Honestly, what does it tell
about the code itself if upstream has no idea how to do proper
versioning?
 
> Any suggestions to avoid to create some noise in the future with this
> watch file ? :-)
> [1] https://people.debian.org/~eriberto/#fake-packages

This would be the very last means.  Lets wait for upstream response
and keep on thinking what to do next.

Thanks for the clarification

     Andreas. 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


Reply to: