Re: Version numbers with parallel frozen and unstable releases

To: debian-policy@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Version numbers with parallel frozen and unstable releases
From: James Troup <J.J.Troup@scm.brad.ac.uk>
Date: 05 Jun 1998 12:14:01 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] dmmaf7sayo6.fsf@dcsun4.comp.brad.ac.uk>
In-reply-to: Fabrizio Polacco's message of "Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:37:55 +0300"
References: <[🔎] 13687.2922.975964.142795@freefly.mathi.uni-heidelberg.de> <[🔎] 19980605013755.D2971@icenet.fi>

Fabrizio Polacco <fpolacco@icenet.fi> writes:

> There is no such need between hamm and slink, so I think that using
> the usual convention for NMU (package_1-2.1 ) would be enough.

Can we please not overload the NMU convention?  If we do it makes it
very hard to determine when the maintainer last uploaded a package,
making it nigh on impossible to track down absentee maintainers other
than by hand.  And absentee maintainers become more of a problem by
the day.

-- 
James
~Yawn And Walk North~

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to:

References:
- Version numbers with parallel frozen and unstable releases
  - From: Gregor Hoffleit <flight@mathi.uni-heidelberg.DE>
- Re: Version numbers with parallel frozen and unstable releases
  - From: Fabrizio Polacco <fpolacco@icenet.fi>

Prev by Date: Re: Version numbers with parallel frozen and unstable releases
Next by Date: Re: /var/mail back to /var/spool/mail
Previous by thread: Re: Version numbers with parallel frozen and unstable releases
Next by thread: Proposed amendment (compiling non-free packages from source in main)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread