Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process"): > Debian version numbers are usually not globally unique. > > The binary packages of dgit 4.3 in Debian and Ubuntu are different > builds from the same sources, and for binary-any packages such > different builds usually have different contents.
This is not particularly interesting, and certainly not an counter-argument against Russ and my position that reusing version numbers for different source packages is bad practice. > And more common is actually the reverse problem of someone publishing > a different 5.0 after a 5.0 is already in our archive (usually by > making modifications without changing the version number). Our tooling makes this too easy to do; and it makes it too hard to do the right thing. Observe here the horrible dch stuff that a user has to type to avoid this confusion: https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/dgit/dgit-user.7.en.html But I'm glad that you recognise that, in this case at least, reuse of the version number is undesirable. > > Version numbers are composed of integers. Getting another integer is > > free, and there is not a limited supply. We won't run out, and missing > > sequence numbers cause no problems in the world. > > Giving every person on the internet the power to steal version numbers > for random packages would be dangerous. ... > Apart from obvious (scripted) DoS for taking all reasonable numbers for > a package, it would also e.g. encourage derivates to steal Debian > version numbers instead of using a proper namespace. Now you seem to be saying 1 having the same version version number referring to multiple different source versions is completely fine because 2 reusing version version numbers should not be forbidden because 3 forbidding reuse of version numbers by Debian might encourage preemptive reuse of *spaces* of version numbers by derivatives and 4 reuse of version number spaces by different origins is bad practice You have almost (but not quite) contradicted your conclusion! If we ask why the final thing in my list above, which you are treating as an axiom, is true, we could continue your pseudosyllogism with because 5 reuse of version number spaces by different origins will probably lead to reuse of version numbers for different source and 6 having the same version version number referring to multiple different source versions is best avoided I think 1 is false, and does not follow from 2. I agree with 2, but I think reusing version numbers is usually bad and should only be done deliberately. > Versions of packages that are accepted into our archive must be unique, > but random people from the internet should not have the power to > restrict what a maintainer can do in Debian. I think that random idiots on the internet should (in principle) have the power to require a maintainer to explicitly override their idiocy. In practice I doubt anyone is going to implement that check soon. Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.