On 25/09/14 08:16, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
> Is there any convention for version numbers in experimental?
>
> E.g. when uploading to backports, we add a suffix like "A.B.C~bpo70+1"
> so that the system can cleanly upgrade to version A.B.C when upgrading
> to the next stable release.
>
> I have a package, version 2.2.5-5 in unstable and testing
Approach 1, which is (IMO) better when the changes you are making in
experimental are truly experimental, like enabling features or patches
whose medium-term future you're not sure about:
2.2.5-5+exp1, ... or -6~exp1, ... or whatever to experimental
2.2.5-6 to unstable
Approach 2, which is (IMO) better when the changes you are making in
experimental are the main line of development, and you're only not
uploading to unstable because you're trying to avoid a freeze or getting
tangled into a transition or something:
2.2.5-6, -7, ... to experimental
2.2.5-5+deb8u1 to unstable (if needed)
(i.e. in approach 2 you're treating the unstable branch as
stable-updates to a stable release that doesn't exist yet).
Either can work. I've done both in the past.
If the upstream versions in unstable and experimental are different (as
in, for instance, GNOME a couple of weeks ago, with 3.12.x in unstable
and 3.13.x in experimental), then you don't need a special suffix either
way because the upstream versions are sufficient.
S
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5423ebf0.2040...@debian.org
