In <7337540c0905181406k63858584r28dbd4883869c...@mail.gmail.com>, Ludovico Cavedon wrote: >On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ><b...@iguanasuicide.net> wrote: >> Just, IMO: >> I prefer 2.2~rc3+hg365~dfsg1 so that 2.2~rc3+hg365 would be greater than >> it. In this way, it would allow distribution of the same upstream >> without repacking for Debian by a non-Debian (or simply unofficial) >> group. > >I think yours is a good point. > >However, as observed Magnus: >> However, that won't work if you have already uploaded e.g. version 1.2-3 >> of a package, and then somebody files a bug that the tarball contains >> some non-free file, and you'd like to upload 1.2~dfsg-1 to fix it >> without waiting for a new upstream release.
In that case +dfsg would be fine (.dfsg is problematic is upstream decides to release a 1.2.1), but you could change it to ~dfsg for the next upstream release. While there are always exceptions, I use the following guidelines: Reserve '.' and digits to upstream. Use + as a decoration when it a a debian "addition" (e.g. pull from more recent VCS revision). Use ~ as a decoration when it is a debian "removal" (e.g. DFSG cleaning). '~alphaN', '~betaN' and '~rcN' conveniently sort the way they should, so you can use $next_upstream_version followed by them or just treat them like VCS snapshots. Still, what version you use should be guided by functionality (how does it sort) rather than pretty stuff. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
