Preparing Poly/ML

Lionel Elie Mamane lionel at
Fri Aug 15 23:09:49 UTC 2008

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:54:27PM +0200, Achim D. Brucker wrote:

> I have only one question regarding a point I already was unsure
> while preparing the package: You've "downgraded" the package version
> to "5.2-1" (...). On the other hand, the versions 5.2.-[123] where
> already available unofficially from my website.

I'd tend to agree with you. With a changelog entry that closes the
ITP, like:

 * (Initial) Upload the Debian (closses: #NNNN)

I think Sylvestre made that change because he was not aware of your
long-standing unofficial package.

Any strong reaction from the others?

> Of course, there are good reasons for both decisions:
> - the official package version starts 5.2-1 then users that already
>   installed the unofficial packages will not receive new one from the
>   official Debian archive.
> - starting the official package with a Debian revision of "4" looks
>   weird and may confuse users.

In my opinion, mere weirdness does not outweigh actual practical
benefits. As to "confuse users", I don't see what confusion it would
raise. It may raise a few eyebrows and make them wonder, but eh.

If somebody insists on an -1, then use an epoch ;-)


More information about the debian-science-maintainers mailing list