Oh, about version naming - can we name non-upstream releases something like (upstream version) "+" (branch / version)?

E.g. in this case, something like "2.0.0+wolke0" (then next build can be "2.0.0+wolke1", ..). Or alternatively, branch-specific naming ("2.0.0+tklock0", "2.0.0+tklock1", ...).

Otherwise, users who have installed "2.0.1b" will have a problem upgrading to the upstream "2.0.1" version when it comes out. Also, it makes troubleshooting easier when users come to upstream to complain about "2.0.1b" that upstream didn't actually release.

If you really go with "2.0.1" (which I strongly recommend against), use "~" + some identifier, so that the real "2.0.1" will always be "newer" than those branched builds (e.g. "2.0.1~wolke0" or "2.0.1~tklock0").

See also: Debian Policy Manual

" One common use of ~ is for upstream pre-releases. For example, 1.0~beta1~svn1245 sorts earlier than 1.0~beta1, which sorts earlier than 1.0. " (https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-po...notes.html#f37)

To make it even easier for users to try out branches, use (current upstream release) + tilde, this way they can always revert the experimental changes by "upgrading" to the current upstream release (e.g. "2.0.0~wolke0" upgrades to "2.0.0").