Control: severity -1 wishlist Control: tags -1 patch Control: merge -1 542288
Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> writes: > I think this is actually #542288? But I'll let the editors decide. Yup, this is basically the same thing. > I've actually changed my mind over this one since seconding #542288, > which I should probably unsecond. I think this is broken, and an NMU > of a native packages should instead convert the packages to non-native > and then use the normal non-native NMU versioning. See > <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/02/msg00230.html> and the > surrounding sub-thread starting at > <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00650.html> for my > rationale. I'd kind of like to keep the discussion of whether to convert native packages to non-native when doing NMUs separate from the version numbering convention if we can, since the latter is just a way of documenting what people are actually doing currently (whether they should do so or not). I think my existing patch in #542288 gets most of this but not all of it. I forget why I didn't apply that in my current cleanup -- I think there were some open questions there, maybe about the native NMU thing? -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>