>>>>> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:
Russ> Hi Sam,
Russ> Thanks for the review! There's now a newer version of this
Russ> diff adjusted for a flaw that Simon pointed out. It's
Russ> sufficiently different from the original diff that I don't
Russ> want to count seconds for the original as seconds for it.
Russ> It's at:
Russ> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=542288#280
Aargh, sorry.
I read Simon's message, and then read your earlier patch in the wrong
order, and thought, wow Russ managed to come up with a way to address
Simon's issue that was shorter than I thought.
(Not realizing that I was responding to a message before you had
addressed it).
I'm happy to second the newer patch in #280 although I have one
non-blocking comment.
+- ``upstream_version`` components in native packages ending in
``+debNuX``
+ indicate a stable update. This is a version of the package uploaded
+ directly to a stable release, and the version is chosen to sort
before
+ any later version of the package uploaded to Debian's unstable or a
+ later stable distribution. ``N`` is the major version number of the
+ Debian stable release to which the package was uploaded, and ``X`` is
a
+ number, starting at 1, that is increased for each stable upload of
this
+ package.
+
Because this comes before [+~]debXuN in the Debian revision, it's easy
for a reader to treat this as a common case on first reading.
I think it's much more common for us to have the stable update noted in
a Debian revision than in the upstream revision, and we should say this.
I hugely confused myself by missing the word "native" in the above and
was starting to think about why we'd ever mark a stable update in the
upstream version of a non-native package.
Your text does in fact include native, but this illustrates how even for
a experienced packager, having the uncommon case first can lead to
confusion.
--Sam
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
