Max Bowsher wrote: > On 05/05/10 09:39, Michael Diers wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> I'm about to merge our PPA branches with current Debian testing, >> lp:debian/squeeze/subversion. I'm starting with karmic today, but I will >> also create a new branch for lucid (and possibly maverick) next. > > Skip maverick for now, there's no point at least until the toolchain is > declared stable. [...]
Max, thanks for the advice. The karmic build went fine in my local pdebuild. Still, I haven't pushed my changes to lp:~svn/ubuntu/karmic/subversion/ppa yet, see below. > The other detail that you'll see in what I did before is that I don't > have a ~karmic1, etc, suffix on the package which I'd consider the > primary line of development of the PPA packaging. The ~series1 suffices > are essentially backport indicators, so there's a certain incongruity in > creating a package which hints at being a backport of a version that > never existed. Plus, it's an indicator which is considered the mainline > packaging on which the next version should be merged. > > I don't have overly strong feelings on whether you want to continue > this, or just bluntly append ~series1 on all versions in the manner many > PPA authors do, but now you know why I didn't. > > > Note that the whole point of the differing versions for different > distroseries is not only that they be distinct, but that the version > numbers compare in the same way as the newness of the distroseries, such > that when someone upgrades from karmic to lucid, the PPA lucid package > is seen as an upgrade to the PPA karmic package. > > Therefore, if you do the initial merge for karmic, and choose not to > append a ~karmic1, it would be incorrect to append a ~lucid1 for a lucid > build - instead you'd need to version it as 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn2 or > 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1lucid1. One could probably argue that the most recent Ubuntu release (lucid) should be the primary line of development of the PPA packaging. I think that was also what Anders had in mind when he suggested the following naming scheme: subversion (1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1) lucid subversion (1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1~karmic1) karmic subversion (1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1~jaunty1) jaunty Hence I think it's best to do the lucid branch first. But I have a few questions; I'm still learning about Bazaar's features. I noticed that currently the branches are stacked, like so: lp:~svn/ubuntu/jaunty/subversion/ppa \ lp:~svn/ubuntu/karmic/subversion/ppa \ lp:ubuntu/lucid/subversion \ lp:ubuntu/subversion Does the following structure represent the intended stack after creation of the lucid PPA branch? lp:~svn/ubuntu/jaunty/subversion/ppa \ lp:~svn/ubuntu/karmic/subversion/ppa \ lp:~svn/ubuntu/lucid/subversion/ppa \ lp:ubuntu/maverick/subversion \ lp:ubuntu/subversion Is it correct to stack the lucid branch on top of lp:ubuntu/maverick/subversion? Do I have to reconfigure the karmic branch to sit atop the new lucid branch? If so, how? > I hope that was elucidating about the twisty labyrinth that is Debian > package versioning :-) Yes, indeed, thank you. -- Michael Diers, elego Software Solutions GmbH, http://www.elego.de _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~svn Post to : svn@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~svn More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp