On 09/05/10 at 01:08 +0200, Tobias Grimm wrote: > PS: > > I've just checked the packages in the ruby-pkg-extras repository and found > at least 2 packages where it seems, that the maintainer used > svn-buildpackage 0.8.0 and tagged a wrong revision: > > May be this gives my point of view, that the tagging behaviour with > "-rBASE" is a problem, a little bit more weight :-) > > $ export tags=svn+alioth://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-ruby-extras/tags > > $ svn cat $tags/libbarby-ruby/0.3.2-1/debian/changelog | head -n1 > libbarby-ruby (0.3-1) unstable; urgency=low > # 0.3.2-1 != 0.3-1 > > $ svn cat $tags/libhaml-ruby/2.2.23-1/debian/changelog | head -n1 > libhaml-ruby (2.2.22-1) unstable; urgency=low > > $ svn cat $tags/libhaml-ruby/2.2.24-1/debian/changelog | head -n1 > libhaml-ruby (2.2.23-1) unstable; urgency=low > > There might be more packages with wrong tags, but it's hard to find them.
Yeah, I totally concur. This behaviour is super-annoying. You are changing the semantics of things that have been working for a long time. - Lucas, who did most of the uploads above -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
