And I forgot the links: 1. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tiff/4.4.0-4ubuntu1 2. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lerc/+bug/1977551
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:24 AM Andreas Hasenack <andr...@canonical.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 9:52 AM Lukas Märdian <sl...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > > > Am 25.05.22 um 13:22 schrieb Marc Deslauriers: > > > [...] > > >> We needed a version that does not contain the word "ubuntu", so it can be > > >> auto-synced, once the committed patch is uploaded into Debian. But at > > >> the same > > >> time we needed it to be bigger than the current version (1.0.1-3build2) > > >> and > > >> wanted it to be smaller than a potential, future "1.0.1-3ubuntu1" > > >> version. We > > >> came up with the following: > > I found myself in a similar situation today, but not quite. > > I uploaded tiff 4.4.0-4ubuntu1[1] with a delta due to a component > mismatch. Eventually the MIR[2] was approved, and I can now remove the > delta, but debian hasn't uploaded a new version yet. How to version > the ubuntu package and allow for auto-sync to sync it in the future? > > 4.4.0-4 (debian) -> 4.4.0-4ubuntu1 (kinetic atm) -> 4.4.0-? (new > kinetic upload without ubuntu in the version) > > I thought of: > a) bite the bullet. Upload 4.4.0-4ubuntu2 dropping the delta, > subscribe to the tiff package in debian, and sync it manually the next > time there is a debian upload > b) use 4.4.0-5~build1 > c) 4.4.0-4willsync1 hits the problem discussed elsewhere here, that if > we need another ubuntu upload *with* delta again, it gets messy > d) 4.4.0-4maysync1 is lower than the current one in kinetic > > I'm leaning towards (a) (4.4.0-4ubuntu2), I don't mind keeping an eye > on the package on the debian side of things, but what do you think of > (b)? -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
