Bug#796442: §5.5 Uploads to suites other than unstable/experimental should use codenames, not suites
Le Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:59:23PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud a écrit :
>
> --- devref.orig.txt 2015-08-21 22:49:46.985614431 +0200
> +++ devref.new.txt 2015-08-21 22:58:15.226984105 +0200
> @@ -2209,9 +2209,10 @@
> from the first line of the debian/changelog file and places it in
> the Distribution field of the .changes file.
>
> - There are several possible values for this field: stable,
> - unstable, testing-proposed-updates and experimental. Normally,
> - packages are uploaded into unstable.
> + Packages are normally uploaded into unstable. Uploads to unstable or
> + experimental should use these suite names in the changelog entry;
> + uploads for other supported suites should use the suite codenames,
> + as they avoid any ambiguity.
>
> Actually, there are other possible distributions: codename
> -security, but read Section 5.8.5, “Handling security-related
Thanks Didier, I think that the change reflects current practice and
should be committed. Here is a DocBook-ised version.
diff --git a/pkgs.dbk b/pkgs.dbk
index 457619d..126eaac 100644
--- a/pkgs.dbk
+++ b/pkgs.dbk
@@ -285,10 +285,10 @@ The package build process extracts this information from the first line of the
<literal>Distribution</literal> field of the <filename>.changes</filename> file.
</para>
<para>
-There are several possible values for this field: <literal>stable</literal>,
-<literal>unstable</literal>, <literal>testing-proposed-updates</literal> and
-<literal>experimental</literal>. Normally, packages are uploaded into
-<literal>unstable</literal>.
+Packages are normally uploaded into <literal>unstable</literal>. Uploads to
+<literal>unstable</literal> or <literal>experimental</literal> should use these
+suite names in the changelog entry; uploads for other supported suites should
+use the suite codenames, as they avoid any ambiguity.
</para>
<para>
Actually, there are other possible distributions:
Are there other comments on Didier's proposal ?
Have a nice week-end,
--
Charles
Reply to: