On 2015-09-17 22:37, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:27:48PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> [...]
>
> So whatever clever trick the maintainer put in debian/control
> (as in this case) is "spoiled", so to speak, by dh.
>
> If we want to support binNMU (which I think we should deprecate, but
> that's another story), why is this not fixed in dh instead?
>
> What you could probably achieve by this bug is that the maintainer
> stops using ${misc:Depends}.
>
It is insufficient to ensure that you have aegisub built exactly from
the same version of the same source. Indeed, there could be an
"${source:Version}.0", which is not the same source version but would
still satisfy the dependency. Even if you fix that, I can always
produce a new version that is "within the range" but has a different
source version.
If you believe it is acceptable to have the versions be out of sync,
then I recommend you get policy clarified. I consider 12.5 a bit
ambiguous on whether "out of sync" versions are allowed.
However, personally, I would err on the side of being too strict since
"Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its copyright
information and distribution license [...]". When versions are out of
sync, the copyright information and distribution license might be as well.
As for binNMUs: Regardless of what happens, they will not disappear over
night. As such, the bug against aegisub remains.
Thanks,
~Niels
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
