On Monday, March 05, 2018 05:54:59 PM Ian Jackson wrote: > Gert Wollny writes ("Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process"): > > The only option I see for doing this in the BTS would be to ask the ftp > > team to file the reject messages as a new bug against the source > > package. I refrained from proposing this because this would mean filing > > a bug against a package version that is not yet available in Debian. > > Since the re-upload to NEW would have the same version like the version > > the bug is filed against, the BTS might get a hiccup. For that reason I > > originally proposed doing this with the salsa issue tracker. > > Personally I think this Debian practice of reusing version numbers for > different packages is absurd. If a package is rejected by ftpmaster > (or by a sponsor, for that matter) the resubmission should have a new > version number.
Taken to it's logical end, then every VCS commit should have it's own revision. I think requiring a maintainer to increment the Debian revision of a package based on things that happen outside the Debian archive is "not a good idea'[1]. Scott K [1] Imagine your own substantially stronger, but non-insulting phrase here.