On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 01:37:00AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 07:44:11PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > > e.g. if you have a package 1.0 and add a complete branch update as a patch > > (or upgrade to a snapshot) one should do a 1.0+gitYYYDDMM-1 or whatever > > format > > you choose. Not 1.0-15 or so. > Here the question is "if you package unreleased changes, should they go to > orig.tar or to debian.tar, am I right?
It boils down to that, but it's not that strict. I just want the version of the package be correct. It's theoretically possible to add the stuff as a patch to 1.0-15 and still make the binary packages 1.0+something-1. Which is a hack and confuses people, but it's possible. A .orig is cleaner, though, sure. > > That's what I just saw on debian-devel-changes: > > > > On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 04:48:47PM +0000, Matthias Klose wrote: > > [...] > > > Changes: > > > gcc-5 (5.3.1-21) unstable; urgency=medium > > > . > > > * GCC 5.4.0 release candidate 1. > [...] > > A 5.4.0 rc1 in a package versioned 5.3.1-21? > [...] > > Package versions should actually tell the correct version... > Here the question is "should the package upstream version be the same as > what the software reports/written in version.h", am I right? Maybe, but that imho is too specific. version.h might contain 2.3 instead of 2.3.5 (to invent some versions), and you wouldn't say "keep 2.3" as version. But having a 5.4.0 rc1 in a 5.3.1-x is wrong for me. Regards, Rene
