On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 02:06:14PM +0200, Brian Sutherland wrote: > On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 09:12:39PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > On the whole, I think you've made a poor compromise. I would suggest > > picking one way or the other, and going all the way with it. As it stands, > > you're going to have trouble uploading a -2 of anything without a new > > upstream tarball anyway, so you're best off just going full-native and being > > done with it. > > Ok, so then a .dx (x = version number)attached to the relevant upstream > version indicating the debian specific branch? I am worried about the > resulting confusion because I should not bump the main projects version > for debian specific changes. > > Could confuse Windows users:) "Why does debian have a bigger version?" What about when you make a release that fixes a critical bug that only manifests itself on Windows? "Why does Windows have a bigger version?" Two options: bump the subpatch version, or tack a .dx version on when you need to fix the debian packaging. You could always just handle Debian changes the same way you would with any other changes -- make a new upstream release whenever there's a bug big enough to warrant it, otherwise just put it into the next regular release. I just had another thought -- make a -1 revision with an empty diff. Weird, but I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work... - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature