Re: Special NMU for pgperl
Hi!
On 2004-02-10 23:03 -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >Do you think it is appropriate if I do the upload myself? I would only
> >update the version number (so that it gets greater than the current
> >one in unstable) and add an apropriate changelog entry.
>
> Yeah, it's good to fix things you broke. :-) You especially want to do this
> before your pgperl makes it into sarge.
I agree, but I wanted to get a second opinion.
> * Version number choice. I suggest version 1:2.18-4.1 for Stephen's pgperl;
> it is greater than the "overwriting" version you uploaded; and is an NMU
> version number so as to alert Stephen that something funny happened (in case
> he loses all these emails). Apart from the epoch, it's the standard next NMU
> version. :-)
Hmm, I had not used a NMU version since I did not (really) change
anything. Are there any other opinions? If not, I will use the NMU
number.
> * What to call *your* pgperl. Check that it doesn't conflict with any other
> existing packages before uploading this time. ;-)
This is already settled, I called it after the binary package:
libpg-perl. Its already uploaded.
Thanks and have a nice day!
Martin
--
Martin Pitt Debian GNU/Linux Developer
martin@piware.de mpitt@debian.org
http://www.piware.de http://www.debian.org
Reply to: