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

Re: question about increasing versionnumbers



On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:30:30AM +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 11:24:54PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> > Hi Mentors,
> 
> > as I've noticed no one is rightnow interested in sponsoring my
> > tvbrowser-package. But since, I really want to maintain this package (I use
> > it for myself) I have a question about future changes I'll make in this
> > package.
> 
> > What is the best practice, when making small changes to the package like
> > fixing typos and stuff? Should I stick to my "initial release" or should i
> > alter the Versionnumber everytime I make change?
> 
> > And the next question in a bigger context: What if a new upstream comes out
> > while my package is not sponsored? Should I pretend to maintain a real
> > package and alter the changelog and stuff or should the last package which
> > is not part of debian always be the "initial release"?
> 
> If your package is available for people other than yourself to
> download, I would definately suggest pretending it's in the
> archive, and update versions accordingly.
Otherwise, users will never see the updates.

> It also gives your eventual sponsor history for the package,
> providing more evidence as to your commitment and skills,
> especially over the long term. (Which is important, so that
> your package does not get sponsored once, then bitrot.)
Yes, I agree here, from experience.

One interesting idea was to use an NMU version scheme for unofficial
packages:

	foo_1.2.3-0.1 (supposing it is 1 based)
	foo_1.2.3-0.2
	foo_1.2.3-0.3
	...
	foo_1.2.4-0.1 (I guess)
	foo_1.2.4-0.2
	...


Then, I guess you should change the version number and add a changelog
entry when you're sponsored:

foo_1.2.4-1:

 * Update version for upload to d.o archive, thanks Sponsor Dude
   (Closes: #111111)

Greetings,
Justin



Reply to: