Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Laurent Vallar wrote: > > Sinatra 1.0 has been released and packaging is done : nothing more to > > do, trunk is ready... > > I should ask a DD to review SVN libsinatra-ruby but there is a big > > problem : latest versions were numbered 1.0.a then 1.0.b and now the > > release is ... 1.0 ! > > > > What to do in this case ? Ask upstream to fix release number or else > > do something to debian changelog ? > > You can use 1.0.really1.0-1 as a version, for example. > For alpha and beta releases, it is better to use the ~ character, that > is lower than all other characters.
Let me put in a vote to use something like 1.0.really1.0-1 as Lucas suggests. If the upstream is reasonably active now as it sounds like it is then almost certainly this will be short lived and a new later version number will soon appear, you can package it and the old version problems will all disappear into the archives. Because although an epoch can save a bad situation it also adds a complication that lasts *forever*. Which is a shame when in a case like this it can easily be avoided. Just my opinion... Bob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
