Hi,

Paragraph 5.6.12. Version describes the version parts epoch,
upstream_version, and debian_revision. But it does not describe how to
use the Debian revision in Debian itself and in derivatives like Ubuntu.

To make packages in derivatives work seamlessly with Debian, I propose
following scheme (which is used in Ubuntu, in-house, and by me
personally):

The derivative selects a name for using in the debian_revision (e.g.
Ubuntu uses "ubuntu", we use "ionos" in-house, and I use "bd" for
personal builds). Then following rules apply:

 * no change in the package version when using the source package
   unmodified (e.g. 1.2-3)

 * Add <derivative>X to the Debian package version starting with X=1 and
   incrementing X on every new upload when the source package is
   modified (e.g. 1.2-3ubuntu1)

 * If the upstream version is not packaged for Debian yet, use
   0<derivative>X as debian_revision with X=1 and incrementing X on
   every new upload (e.g. 1.3-0ubuntu1).

 * If the Debian package is backported to an older derivative and needs
   changes for it, add ~<derivative>X to the debian_revision (e.g.
   1.2-3~bd1).

Is the Debian policy the correct place to document that?

This one is slightly annoying because it leads to two different binary
packages with identical filenames.

...

This is the issue. Of course policy can document what it wants, but it
does not have authority over non-Debian projects.

Cheers,

Hello,

To be honest I'm not sure it is.  What do you think about using a DEP
for this?