Re: binNMUs and versions

To: Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org>
Cc: debian-wb-team@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: binNMUs and versions
From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:30:04 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 20100611193004.GV13148@mails.so.argh.org>
Mail-followup-to: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>, Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org>, debian-wb-team@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1276279591.19806.3.camel@kirk>
References: <[🔎] 20100611162540.GU13148@mails.so.argh.org> <[🔎] 1276279591.19806.3.camel@kirk>

* Joachim Breitner (nomeata@debian.org) [100611 20:06]:
> Hi,
> 
> Am Freitag, den 11.06.2010, 18:25 +0200 schrieb Andreas Barth:
> > What do you think?
> 
> from a „user“ POV, I’m all for it. I find the current state quite
> confusing.

I would tend to put the proper version number in all fields, and the
binnmu_* only to exist until the package reaches the installed state.
What do you think?


Andi

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: binNMUs and versions
  - From: Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org>

References:
- binNMUs and versions
  - From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
- Re: binNMUs and versions
  - From: Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: binNMUs and versions
Next by Date: Re: binNMUs and versions
Previous by thread: Re: binNMUs and versions
Next by thread: Re: binNMUs and versions
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread