Re: package versions with snapshots/branch updates (was: Re: Accepted gcc-5 5.3.1-21 (source) into unstable)
On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 01:37:00AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 07:44:11PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > e.g. if you have a package 1.0 and add a complete branch update as a patch
> > (or upgrade to a snapshot) one should do a 1.0+gitYYYDDMM-1 or whatever format
> > you choose. Not 1.0-15 or so.
> Here the question is "if you package unreleased changes, should they go to
> orig.tar or to debian.tar, am I right?
It boils down to that, but it's not that strict. I just want the version
of the package be correct.
It's theoretically possible to add the stuff as a patch to 1.0-15 and
still make the binary packages 1.0+something-1. Which is a hack and
confuses people, but it's possible. A .orig is cleaner, though, sure.
> > That's what I just saw on debian-devel-changes:
> >
> > On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 04:48:47PM +0000, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Changes:
> > > gcc-5 (5.3.1-21) unstable; urgency=medium
> > > .
> > > * GCC 5.4.0 release candidate 1.
> [...]
> > A 5.4.0 rc1 in a package versioned 5.3.1-21?
> [...]
> > Package versions should actually tell the correct version...
> Here the question is "should the package upstream version be the same as
> what the software reports/written in version.h", am I right?
Maybe, but that imho is too specific. version.h might contain 2.3 instead of
2.3.5 (to invent some versions), and you wouldn't say "keep 2.3" as version.
But having a 5.4.0 rc1 in a 5.3.1-x is wrong for me.
Regards,
Rene
Reply to: