Re: Bug#547272: policy 5.6.16 - Format field: Is it really 1.5?

2009-10-05 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 05 Oct 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> > and that it can be more than a version number. >> >> I assume this refers to the Format field in the .dsc file. > > Yes. > >> Since policy does not currently say anything about the Format fiel

Re: Bug#547272: policy 5.6.16 - Format field: Is it really 1.5?

2009-10-05 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > and that it can be more than a version number. > > I assume this refers to the Format field in the .dsc file. Yes. > Since policy does not currently say anything about the Format field in > the .dsc file, we would need to mention any con

Re: Bug#547272: policy 5.6.16 - Format field: Is it really 1.5?

2009-10-04 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Fri, Sep 18 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: >> In policy 5.6.16, about Format field I read: >> : This field specifies a format revision for the file. The most >> current format : described in the Policy Manual is version 1.5. The >> synta

Bug#547272: policy 5.6.16 - Format field: Is it really 1.5?

2009-09-18 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Hi, On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > In policy 5.6.16, about Format field I read: > : This field specifies a format revision for the file. The most current format > : described in the Policy Manual is version 1.5. The syntax of the format > : value is the same as that of a packa

Bug#547272: policy 5.6.16 - Format field: Is it really 1.5?

2009-09-18 Thread Giacomo A. Catenazzi
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.8.3.0 In policy 5.6.16, about Format field I read: : This field specifies a format revision for the file. The most current format : described in the Policy Manual is version 1.5. The syntax of the format : value is the same as that of a package version number e