Bug#850729: debian-policy: Documenting special version number suffixes
Control: severity -1 wishlist
Control: tags -1 patch
Control: merge -1 542288
Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> writes:
> I think this is actually #542288? But I'll let the editors decide.
Yup, this is basically the same thing.
> I've actually changed my mind over this one since seconding #542288,
> which I should probably unsecond. I think this is broken, and an NMU
> of a native packages should instead convert the packages to non-native
> and then use the normal non-native NMU versioning. See
> <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/02/msg00230.html> and the
> surrounding sub-thread starting at
> <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00650.html> for my
> rationale.
I'd kind of like to keep the discussion of whether to convert native
packages to non-native when doing NMUs separate from the version numbering
convention if we can, since the latter is just a way of documenting what
people are actually doing currently (whether they should do so or not).
I think my existing patch in #542288 gets most of this but not all of it.
I forget why I didn't apply that in my current cleanup -- I think there
were some open questions there, maybe about the native NMU thing?
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: