Hi Dylan, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 04:54:59PM +0100, Dylan wrote: > Yes, uscan reports a new version of beagle (27Jul16.86a) but it is not > a true new version, it is the same version already in Debian > (4.1~160727-86a+dfsg-1). > Upstream uses a bad versioning scheme based on dates which "breaks" > our system and seems not be interested in changing it by a more > standard versioning scheme. > So, I converted the version by something more standard (maybe not > optimal, I understand).
I think your conversion makes some sense. There would even be a chance to uversionmangle s/Jan/01/;s/Feb/02/; ... s/(\d\d)(\d\d)(\d\d)/$3$2$1/ to get a sortable date out of this. But before we start inventing really crazy things in d/watch I wrote another e-mail to upstream (list in CC). > Maybe, I should disable the watch file using something like that [1] > but the current watch file permits me to quickly/regularly check if > new upstream version is released. I'd really love to get watch files working and hope that upstream will consider sane versions after a second mail. Honestly, what does it tell about the code itself if upstream has no idea how to do proper versioning? > Any suggestions to avoid to create some noise in the future with this > watch file ? :-) > [1] https://people.debian.org/~eriberto/#fake-packages This would be the very last means. Lets wait for upstream response and keep on thinking what to do next. Thanks for the clarification Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
