On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:26:02PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi, > > On 12-06-2019 21:54, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > Le 12/06/2019 à 20:38, Paul Gevers a écrit : > > > >> Can you explain why, please? > > > > You mean why not using the +really version in testing? Because that's > > ugly and confusing for the end users I guess. > > I'd still like Matthias to confirm, but that is not a good reason from > the release teams point of view. We have quite a few +really versions > already, one more won't hurt.
Hi Paul, Things are looking good so far with 11.0.4+4+really11.0.3+7 in unstable, and so I would like to prepare the t-p-u upload. At the moment, the version I have is 11.0.3+7-5, since that would have been the "next" 11.0.3+7 Debian revision for unstable. The 11.0.3+7 orig.tar.xz already in the archive is the same one used for the "really" to unstable and this build, and this versioning makes it clear to users what they are getting. The resulting changelog would be: > diff -Nru openjdk-11-11.0.4+4+really11.0.3+7/debian/changelog > openjdk-11-11.0.3+7/debian/changelog > --- openjdk-11-11.0.4+4+really11.0.3+7/debian/changelog 2019-06-14 > 12:28:25.000000000 -0700 > +++ openjdk-11-11.0.3+7/debian/changelog 2019-06-16 11:24:19.000000000 > -0700 > @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ > +openjdk-11 (11.0.3+7-5) buster; urgency=medium > + > + * Team upload. > + * Upload 11.0.4+4+realy11.0.3+7-2 to buster t-p-u. > + > + -- tony mancill <tmanc...@debian.org> Sun, 16 Jun 2019 11:24:19 -0700 Is this acceptable to the Release Team? If not, (and I know there have been some differing opinions), how shall we version the t-p-u package? Thank you, tony
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
