On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 09:47:34AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > The BIG problem is how to get the next-version. Say you have version > > > 1.2-3. A binNMU would be 1.2-3+b1, a security release would be > > > 1.2-3etch1 (unless there was a binNMU).
> > In the Great Scheme, these were supposed to become 1.2-3+etch1 instead of > > 1.2-3etch1 so that security NMUs would sort higher than binNMUs... > And they didn't because? There simply has been no pressing need for it. Once etch is released, there will be a large number of released packages that have been binNMUed, so the security NMU naming scheme will need to adapt at that point. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
