On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 08:52:01AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > * Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-23 11:33]: > > > VisualOS seems to be a native package. The previous maintainer was > > > also the upstream developer (it's a SourceForge project). > > > > > > So should I convert this to a normal style package instead? Is it as > > > straightforward as renaming the tarball? > > > > It's a native package which uses non-native version numbers... I think > > it should be non-native. Ideally, obtain the upstream .tar ball, make > > a diff to the current package and use that as the Debian diff. And > > when you build -3, include the new .orig.tar, but it will need another > > name as the one currently in the archive. (Ugh, messy.) > > Hmm. I've read the other emails regarding the new tarball having .orig in > the name. The version in sid/sarge is a released version + CVS stuff. It's > horrible. I'm going to deviate from my normal practise of not updating > upstream versions for my QA uploads and package the newer upstream > version... >
The plot thickens... The upstream source is a debianized source tree, so what does this mean for me? Carry on as normal with respect to version numbering and orig.tar.gz whatnot? regards Andrew
