Am Donnerstag, 22. März 2007 schrieb Manoj Srivastava: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:37:16 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Am Mittwoch, 21. März 2007 schrieb Manoj Srivastava: > >> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:56:44 -0300, Margarita Manterola > >> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> > On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may > >> >> use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? > >> > > >> > If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. > >> > Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release > >> > candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 > >> > >> Hmm? Suppose upstream version is currently 1.07 released, and they > >> are planning on releasing 1.08 in the future. Now they are running > >> through 1.08 release candidates, and so we have 1.08 rc1, soon to > >> be followed by 1.08 rc2. The upstream version variables, used by > >> them, are all at 1.08 (not 1.08 '~'. > >> > >> How do you propose the debian releases of the release candidates be > >> numbered? When upstream releases, upstream releases shall have > >> 1.08, 1.08.1 or 1.08-1, and so on. > > > > The upstream currently released is 1.0.8.2. Coming is 1.0.8.3 > > followed by 1.0.9, if there isn't a 1.0.8.4 ;) > > [Bunch of irrelevant stuff snipped] > > > Was that your question? > > If you read above, nothing to do with the example you are > quoting, which is a mere red herring. The distinction between the > cases is that in my example the upstream is releasing release > candidates, and not the Debian developer. > > My contention is that if the Debian maintainer wants to ship > release candidates from upstream, then it is perfectly acceptable to > use 1.0.8~rc1-1. > > manoj
Aha ... now we know ;) Lg Roman