On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 08:07:32PM +0200, Felix Natter wrote: > hi, > > finally we've talked the JMapViewer maintainers into making proper > release archives, and they did, but unfortunately, they used svn > revision numbers instead of adequate versions: > > http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/viewer/jmapviewer/releases/29618/JMapViewer-29618-Source.zip > > => The question is: Can we use "29618" (or "svn29618" or "r29618") as > the debian version number (consistent with upstream) or do we have to > use "0.0+svn29618"?
As hilarious as it is, that's fine. 29618-1 sounds OK. It's a bit insane, but it's OK. If they move to low numbers (1.0), you can bump the epoch (1:1.0-1) to match, since that's what they did in reality. > > A pointer to debian policy is appreciated. I couldn't find anything > here: > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ Section 5.6.12 covers the epoch :) > > Thanks and Best Regards, > -- > Felix Natter Cheers, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paul...@debian.org> : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
