Re: Adam D. Barratt 2014-09-25 <3653b875c93fd474b8b354b4c76f4...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org> > On 2014-09-25 8:16, Daniel Pocock wrote: > >Or should my next upload > >to unstable by 2.2.5-8? Or do I just ignore the version numbers I > >uploaded to experimental and use 2.2.5-6 as the next version number for > >an unstable upload, even if it doesn't contain the same things as > >2.2.5-6 in experimental? > > No. Under no circumstances should version numbers be reused. (There's some > disagreement about cases such as reintroducing old packages that aren't even > in oldstable any more, but a contemporaneous upload to multiple suites using > the same version number is absolutely wrong.)
We recently reintroduced cl-interpol 0.2.1-1 to sid, after the package was removed in 2009. There were still around half a dozen installations reported on popcon, but the worse part is that this made the UDD changes importer explode with a unique key violation. I think they fixed it by deleting this upload from UDD, and we quickly uploaded -2 to get the package also upgraded on the old systems out there, but the bottom line should be "don't do that". Christoph -- c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
