Package: developers-reference Version: 3.4.12 Severity: wishlist Hi,
I think the developers reference could use a unified section of all conventions around Debian versions. I will split this email into three subsections which I think make sense for the new section I propose. I was also told in #debian-mentors that there is disagreement of what the right way is. These obviously need to be solved first. Version number sorting ====================== Debian policy §5.6.12 also comprehensively explains how version numbers are compared but I think it would be useful to have some additional practical advises in the devref like: - use `dpkg --compare-versions` if in doubt. This is already mentioned in 5.8.5.4. "Preparing packages to address security issues" but this is probably not the section name where one would expect such advise. - the general meaning of adding a "~" or a "+". Like, a practical example that it has to be 3.1~rc1 for release candidates which have to sort lower than the final release. And in that context how the "+" in +debXuY and +nmuX is used to sort higher than the version before but lower than the next. This info is already mentioned about the former (+debXuY) in 5.8.5.4. but a new section about versions would probably be a more appropriate place for this kind of information. debian_revision postfixes ========================= Debian policy §5.6.12 comprehensively explains the format of a version number consisting of epoch, upstream_version and debian_revision. But it does not explain about postfixes like +nmuX, +debXuY or ~bpoX+Y. A new section could summarize these additional conventions and when they are used. It would also link to the sections in dev ref where they are explained in more detail. This section could also be used to answer the question: what version postfix to use for a security NMU: +nmuX or +debXuY? Probably the latter but it's not spelled out anywhere as far as I can see. Or what to do for a backport NMU? This section would allow to get a unified overview of the possible postfixes, what they are used for, why they are useful in terms of versioning (and associated sorting) and that they are a comprehensive list of debian_revision postfixes. Backports do not seem to be part of the dev ref yet but are documented at http://backports.debian.org/Contribute/ upstream_version postfixes ========================== In addition, there exist some common postfixes to the upstream_version like +dfsg or +ds. Looking through my local Sources list, there also seem to be lot of usage of ~dfsg, ~ds, .dfsg, .ds, -dfsg, -ds etc. This section of the developer's reference could explain which one is the right one to use, probably using the prior explanations about sorting in the first section as arguments which one the "right" way is. Are there others? What do you think? cheers, josch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150108105354.25558.34191.reportbug@hoothoot
