Bug#881431: proposed wording

[Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>]

On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 at 11:47:09 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > §3.2.2 Uniqueness of version numbers
> >
> > The part of the version number after the epoch must not be reused for
> > a version of the package with different contents once the package has
> > been accepted into the archive, even if the version of the package
> > previously using that part of the version number is no longer present
> > in any archive suites.
> >
> > This uniqueness requirement applies to the version numbers of source
> > packages and of binary packages, even if the source package producing
> > a given binary package changes.  Thus the version numbers which a
> > binary package must not reuse includes the version numbers of any
> > versions of the binary package ever accepted into the archive, under
> > any source package.
> >
> > Additionally, for non-native packages, the upstream version must not
> > be reused for different upstream source code, so that for each source
> > package name and upstream version number there exists exactly one
> > original source archive contents [reference to defintiion of that].
> >
> > The reason for these restrictions is as follows.  Epochs are not
> > included in the names of the files that compose source packages, or in
> > the filenames of binary packages, so reusing a version number, even if
> > the epoch differs, results in identically named files with different
> > contents.  This can cause various problems.
> >
> > If you find yourself wanting to reuse the part of a version number
> > after the epoch, you can just increment the Debian revision, which
> > doesn't need to start at 1 or be consecutive.

Seconded, thanks.