[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#542288: debian-policy: Version numbering: native packages, NMU's, and binary only uploads



>>>>> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:

    Russ> Hi Sam,

    Russ> Thanks for the review!  There's now a newer version of this
    Russ> diff adjusted for a flaw that Simon pointed out.  It's
    Russ> sufficiently different from the original diff that I don't
    Russ> want to count seconds for the original as seconds for it.
    Russ> It's at:

    Russ> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=542288#280

Aargh, sorry.
I read Simon's message, and then read your earlier patch in the wrong
order, and thought, wow Russ managed to come up with a way to address
Simon's issue that was shorter than I thought.
(Not realizing that I was responding to a message before you had
addressed it).

I'm happy to second the newer patch in #280 although I have one
non-blocking comment.

+- ``upstream_version`` components in native packages ending in
``+debNuX``
+  indicate a stable update.  This is a version of the package uploaded
+  directly to a stable release, and the version is chosen to sort
before
+  any later version of the package uploaded to Debian's unstable or a
+  later stable distribution.  ``N`` is the major version number of the
+  Debian stable release to which the package was uploaded, and ``X`` is
a
+  number, starting at 1, that is increased for each stable upload of
this
+  package.
+


Because this comes before [+~]debXuN in the Debian revision, it's easy
for a reader to treat this as a common case on first reading.
I think it's much more common for us to have the stable update noted in
a Debian revision than in the upstream revision, and we should say this.


I hugely confused myself by missing the word "native" in the above  and
was starting to think about why we'd ever mark a stable update in the
upstream version of a non-native package.
Your text does in fact include native, but this illustrates how even for
a experienced packager, having the uncommon case first can  lead to
confusion.

--Sam

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: