On 12-07-27 at 10:02pm, IRIE Shinsuke wrote: > I forgot to say that actually there were official deb packages using > "+cvs" suffix in the past (ex. 2.25b+cvs.2003.02.17-1). So, "+svn" > suffix might be used for the future versions of the official packages. > > I mean the versioning scheme like 2.63.1 is generally necessary, not > only for my PPA's packages.
I do not find it "necessary" for Debian to follow a naming scheme used in Ubuntu, just as upstream should not worry about Debian when they choose a naming scheme. Ubuntu developers are strongly encouraged to help maintain packages in Debian as a better alternative to try second-guess future naming of Debian packages. When Ubuntu introduces packages in their repos that does not exist in Debian, there is a real risk of diverging from Debian. It only makes sense to me to treat Debian as upstream to Ubuntu - not the opposite. Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
