On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:29:57PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > So, we should have: > ,---- > | Format: > | Version:= [<epoch>`:']<upstream_version>[`-'<debian_revision>] > | Native Package NMU's: > | Version =~ m/\+nmu\d+$/ > | Binary Only NMU's: > | Version =~ m/\+b\d+$/ > `---- > The next tgree are tentative: > ,---- > | Non-native package NMU: > | Version =~ m/\-\.\d+$/ > `---- > This is tentative since I can't see why we need to outlaw > packages adding \+nmu\d+ even on non-native packages. Perhaps policy > should butt out here, if the pattern is different for non-native NMU's > than for Native package NMU's. Thus far, consistent with current practice. > ,---- > | Stable Security NMU's > | Version =~ m/\+deb\d\d.\d+$/ > | Testing Security NMU's > | Version =~ m/\+debt\d\d.\d+$/ > `---- > These last two do not have buy in from the security team, as far > as I can tell. Right, since they're not actually being used by the security team I don't think there's anything to be gained by declaring in policy that the security team /should/ use this. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature