Re: call for epoch (was Re: Bug#915553: ITP: pd-csound -- Csound external for Pure Data)
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 10:13:08 +0100
- From: IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) <umlaeute@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: call for epoch (was Re: Bug#915553: ITP: pd-csound -- Csound external for Pure Data)
On 05.12.18 20:19, Paul Gevers wrote:
> On 04-12-2018 20:03, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote:
>> as mandated by the policy, i'd like to discuss, whether an epoch bump
>> for the new source package "pd-csound" (to be "2:1.01.0-1") is
>> warranted, or indeed a good idea.
> Can at least the source package not carry the any special epoch, or is
> that too confusing?
is there any advantage of this?
the source package currently only builds a single binary package (and i
don't expect this to change).
so i think that having different version numbers for source and binary
package to only add complexity to the packaging with little gain.
i have already uploaded to NEW yesterday (after the discussion here
seemed to indicate consensus on the epoch bump), but of course it's
awaiting ftp-masters' approval, so there is still time to re-upload.