Holger Levsen wrote: > On Montag, 1. April 2013, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> Rather than accept the harm, surely the release team could simply roll >> back the upload in some manner? > > As I understand it, only by introducing an epoch in the package version. Or by using the 9.0.0+really0.99-1 version convention, which IMHO for is way better for cases of temporary backtracking like this. But in this particular case, leaving it alone in unstable would be better still. The release is not that far away, and it is not impossible to maintain packages in testing even when the package in sid has moved on. Regards, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130408053404.GA28322@elie.Belkin
