On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:06:50PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 11:48:32 AM CDT Paul Wise wrote:
> > Your upstream isn't naming snapshot tarballs correctly. This should be
> > fixed either in boost upstream 
> I know this is the popular Debian perception and certainly it is a nuisance 
> that the filenames are not unique.  All I will say is that the folks 
> releasing 
> Boost are not novices and likely have a defensible reason for their madness.  

This is not a Debian perceptions, it is just bad when published tarballs 
with different names carry the same contents.

And based on real-life experience in companies, I can tell you that even 
"we are doing it this way for 20 years" does not necessarily imply that 
there is (or ever was) any defensible reason...

The uscan issue might be fixed due to quick action by Paul, but could 
you anyway ask upstream to switch to a unique naming scheme?

It is really hard to imagine any defensible reason for naming the daily 
snapshot from master boost_1_62_0.tar.bz2 instead of something like 

> Best,
> -Steve



       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Reply via email to