Naming packages when upstream uses dashes in the release version

[Alexander Ploumistos]

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Petr Pisar <ppisar at redhat.com> wrote:
> The upstream obviously doesn not differentiate between `upstream
> release' and `Debian package'.

Unfortunately, no.

> Does the upstream bundle `debian'
> directory with patches in the tar archive? Are these patches applied
> automatically by the build script?

The source package contains all the scripts that are required to build
either deb packages or rpms. However this was their first and only
release of the driver back in 2012 and I highly doubt they will bother
with this series ever again.

> Maybe you could completely ignore the `-1' upstream mantra.

I have been tempted to do just that from the very beginning.


Thank you all for your input, I'll probably go with the
foo-3.80_1-1.rpm format and swap their local %{VERSION} macro with
something like %{upstream_v_nr} to make my life easier.

I still think someone with more experience than me should add
something to the wiki,
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators
does not list such an exception (or if it does, I don't get it).