Hello, On Sun 22 Jun 2025 at 06:40pm +01, Ian Jackson wrote: > Does your mail client have the ability to quote a diff hunk from one > of my patch attachments? That's what I normally do, and there was no particular reason I didn't do it this time. My apologies. >> A native source package is one that does not distinguish between >> Debian packaging releases and upstream releases > > This old text is in ch-source.rst. But it talks about "releases" > which is ambiguous: do we mean version numbers or representation in > the physical source package? Ah. If you make it "making a Debian package release and making an upstream release" then I think that removes the ambiguity. That is how I was implicitly reading it, I think. >> there may be multiple Debian package versions associated with a >> single upstream release version and sharing the same upstream source >> tar files. > > Again this is the old text in ch-source.rst. Again, this old text > conflates source package format with versiooning. "Associated" is > imprecise. I don't see how this conflates source package format with versioning. So far as I can see, it only talks about versioning. >> seems easier to understand than >> >> Successive updates to the package within Debian, based on the same >> upstream version ... > > This is a quote from my new text for ch-controlfields.rst. So this is > not supposed to be a direct replacement for the text above. Okay, then forget about this part, I misunderstood it as being a replacement. > I'm happy to change it to something else. We could use "upstream > release" but of course that assumes that every upstream version in > Debian corresponds to something that upstream think of as a release, > which is wrong in a different way. The fact that we sometimes package non-releases seems minor and not worth complicating things over, but using "upstream source" to avoid it is fine with me. -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature