Adding #748465 since it also raised the issue of the renaming. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:56:09PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 20.05.2014, 19:10 +0200 schrieb Andreas Tille: > > So what would be your suggestion to solve this issue to get some > > appendix to the version number. I think editing each debian/watch > > file an mangling names is a bit clumsy. > > I don’t think its too bad, and at least its explicit, but I don’t use > that feature myself (yet). > > Would it be less clumsy if you did not have to specify some specific sed > expression, but could rather had a simple way to flag uscan to „do the > usual and commonly accepted version mangling“? That would be more > declarative, less line-noisy and less for you to type.
The type of suffix varies depending on the reason the tarball is being repacked. The two common ones are [+.]dsN and [+.]dfsgN where the former indicates the tarball has been repacked and the latter indicates that the repack was due to DFSG violations. Not everyone includes the N (+dfsg1 vs. +dfsg) but I think it's a good idea in case the same upstream version needs to be repacked differently for some reason. Given the above, how about a “--repack-suffix …” that gets passed through to mk-origtargz? So “uscan … --repack-suffix +dfsg1” or a similar mk-origtargz invocation repacks and adds +dfsg1 to the upstream version. This could possibly be exposed by a new opts value in the watch file itself -- opts=repacksuffix=+dfsg1 Cheers, -- James GPG Key: 4096R/331BA3DB 2011-12-05 James McCoy <james...@debian.org>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature