On 13/06/09 at 13:10 +0800, Enrico Zini wrote: > Package: developers-reference > Version: 3.4.1 > Severity: wishlist > > Hello, > > In "5.11.2. NMUs and debian/changelog", it is suggested to version NMU > by appending "+nmuN". > > It seems however that many people prefer to only use "+nmuN" on native > packages; see discussion at: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2009/05/msg00031.html > > I understand that +nmu1 is not a bad idea for debian native packages, > where you wouldn't be able to tell if a passage from 1.0 to 1.0.1 is a > new upstream verion or a NMU. However, it is unnecessary, and indeed it > look ugly, on non-native packages. > > The simplest change to the Developer's Reference to document this could > be adding a paragraph like the following before the paragraph "A special > versioning scheme...": > > For non-native packages, many developers prefer to append ".N" instead > of "+nmuN". For example, NMUs of a package with version "1.0-2" would > have versions "1.0-2.1", "1.0-2.2" and so on.
I don't think that we should suggest two different schemes. I took a look at all the NMUs since the beginning of 2009, and it is clear that the schemes that are used are: -X.X for non-native packages +nmuX for native packages I'll update the devref to reflect that. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org