Re: binNMUs and versions
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 10:51:36PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > I'd rather see the binNMU version in the installed_version field - after
> > all, for that architecture, that is the version that is installed. When
> > filing a binNMU it is confusing to first see it go from 1.0-1
> > (Installed) to 1.0-1+b1 (Needs-Build) to 1.0-1+b1 (Built) to 1.0-1
> > (Installed). I'd expect it to stay at 1.0-1+b1 (Installed), if you know
> > what I mean.
> Eh, I need to translate myself I assume:
> "I would tend to put the version number including the binary epoch
> (e.g. 1.2.3+b1) in all fields, ...".
I'm not sure how you'll get that to work, because you wouldn't
know what the source version is anymore?