Re: Intermediate texlive-base release?

[Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>]

Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> Now that we have updated packages of pgf, beamer, xcolor in Debian I am
> thinking about doing an intermediate texlive-base release.
>
> So I wanted to ask you opinion on this:
> texlive-base (2005.dfsg.2-2~int1) unstable; urgency=medium
>
>   * blacklist beamer, xcolor, pgf and depend on the respective Debian packages
>   * intermediate release to get better dependency chains
>   * urgency set to medium as this package will override the one in
>     unstable and for the testing transition these two revision fix RC bugs.

You don't need to set the urgency to medium.  If you uploaded version n
with urgency medium and upload a version >n after that, but before n got
into testing, the newer version will inherit the urgency.

> Questions:
> - I would like to keep the debian release generally in sync. Is it ok
>   to make intermediate releases like this with a version number
>   2005.dfsg.2-2~int1?

This will confuse everybody who doesn't know why you do that.  And
frankly, I don't believe that in the long run we'll be able to keep
everything in sync.  Just look at the teTeX packages, both in etch and
sarge:  tetex-base always had new tarballs because of some non-free
files, whereas tetex-bin never needed that.  Furthermore, there were
weeks and months without an upload of tetex-bin, but many of
tetex-base.  

IMHO, we should just use -2 and let them diverge.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)