While repology tries its best in matching packages across different repositories, this is quite a complex task:
Packages of a single software project may be named differently in some repositories (for instance, libagg vs. agg, dungeoncrawl vs. dungeon-crawl, fonts-linuxlibertine vs. fonts-ttf-linuxlibertine vs. linux-libertine-fonts vs. linuxlibertine-fonts-ttf).
There may be multiple unrelated software projects with a same name (for instance, clementine is both X11 window manager and a media player).
Some packages may use incorrect versions (for instance, picking "next" version number which was not released yet when packaging a git snapshot, or using dates and commit hashes instead of version numbers).
Repology uses a set of manually edited rules to resolve these cases. You may submit a change to the ruleset directly or use this form to suggest an improvement to the ruleset. Please only use this for for problems which may be fixed by the ruleset (which are basically problems listed above).
Current reports (1)
Created more than a year ago,
The project needs some version(s) to be marked as ignored
Comment: I'm not sure what the best solution is here, but 1.0 is the upstream short version and the current real version is 1.0.3. Maybe all of the 1.0 packages should be ignored as incorrect versions?
Repology reply: That would be incorrect, as both versioning schemes are used by upstream and are thus equally correct. I've filed an upstream issue: https://github.com/Numbertext/libnumbertext/issues/35, let's see how this turns out. If this is not fixed by upstream, we can fix that by mapping 1.0 to 1.0.3 to keep it comparable.
Update: new version 1.0.5 has been released, tag and version were brought in sync. There's no need to do anything on repology side.