On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 02:55:46PM +0100, Robie Basak wrote: > Some packages that are Ubuntu-only have `ubuntu` in the version string, > which automatically stops autosync, which is probably what we want. > > Other such Ubuntu-only packages do not, so if Debian were to package > something with the same source package name, it may autosync, which is > probably not what we want. > > Unless it's in the sync blocklist, but now there are three possible > states for an Ubuntu-only package to be with respect to autosync, which > is just unnecessary work for concerned reviewers. > > I just reviewed the following SRUs, which (sort of) uses a mix of both: > > lxd-installer | 1 | focal | source > lxd-installer | 1 | jammy | source > lxd-installer | 4 | noble | source > lxd-installer | 4ubuntu0.1 | noble-updates | source > lxd-installer | 4ubuntu0.2 | noble/unapproved/39f530b | source > lxd-installer | 8 | oracular | source > lxd-installer | 8.1 | oracular/unapproved/74f18e3 | source > lxd-installer | 12 | plucky | source > > Could we agree that all Ubuntu-only packages SHOULD always contain > `ubuntu` in their version string (this would usually be -0ubuntuX or > 0ubuntuX[1] if native) then, so that we don't have to think about it? > > Are there any reasons for an exception to this rule, where an autosync > would actually be desirable if Debian were to introduce such a package? > If it's not for a common reason, then perhaps an additional policy might > be that there SHOULD be something in debian/README.source that explains > any deviation from this.
Funny enough I had that same conversation with Scott James Remnant many years ago on upstart, which had like 0.1.0-1 versions in Ubuntu at the time. I also had exactly the problem where it synced software-properties from Debian because it was not in the blocklist, and software-properties Debian packaging ended up weird (0.90debian1, possibly not an actual version number) But also this is going to get even weirder if we have a package we develop and start to use the ubuntu version string. Then my Debian version of foo 1ubuntu1 will end up 1ubuntu1debian1. Like I can guarantee you, someone will upload 1ubuntu2 with code changes and the Debian uploader will need to package that, rather than a 2ubuntu1. -- debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
