[maemo-developers] Standardization of packages version name in the extra repositories

[From: David Greaves]

David Greaves wrote:
> Jason Edgecombe wrote:
>> Johannes Schmid wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>> This is how I read it too. Only if we are the upstream ourselves, we don't
>>>> need the suffix. In all other cases we need it?
>>>>
>>>> "If an upstream package is re-packaged or otherwise modified for maemo, a
>>>> maemo revision MUST be appended to the upstream revision." MPP section 3.2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>> That's my understanding - hopefully Eero could correct me?
>>>>>       
>>> OK, so I don't need a suffix for hildonmm because I am upstream myself?
>>> What about gtkmm? On the one hand we are more or less upstream (and all
>>> patches go upstream) on the other hand it's of course different from the
>>> debian package.
>>>   
>> OK, so how do I handle the openafs and krb5 packages where there is an
>> upstream debian package, but I didn't use it because the dependencies
>> were so different?
> 
> Maybe:
> if dpkg-buildpackage requires no local patches to produce a deb?
> 
> Surely we should *only* be using debs built by a scratchbox/autobuilder.
> Alien arm debs *might* run but you don't know the gcc version etc etc. And the
> dependency locally may include a -maemo patched package whereas the
> alien/upstream deb won't.
> 
> I managed to get ddd built by building a dependency chain in my sb without any
> patching. I assume that these would not require -maemo version ids.

I posted this late on a friday - maybe I'll get more response during the week.... :)

David