Frederik Schueler writes: > we rename the source package, not the binary packages. No need to > change anything anywhere, we just want a new tarball in the archive > :-)
Could you explain why a new "upstream version number" is insufficient? i.e. why uploading linux-2.6_2.6.18dfsg-1 as a followup to linux-2.6_2.6.18-8 would not solve the problem? > The only real drawback will be the bugreports getting attached to > linux-2.6.18 instead of linux-2.6 (like we already had with .16). If you would change the version number instead of the package name, you would avoid creating that issue. -- Ludovic Brenta. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
