On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Hamish <hamis...@yahoo.com> wrote: > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2011-June/010184.html > > I feel your cringe, but we need a stable, controlled place with > history to house the dfsg version of the source tarball; so > $alioth is it. We could check it in uncompressed, but as the > versioned release is static and should be immutable, and all we > want is the tarball, it would seem to me that the current > solution's benefits outweigh its shortcomings.
Another solution is to use the alioth web space, like pkg-games do: http://pkg-games.alioth.debian.org/tarballs/ > prebuilt graphics are a heck of a lot easier to review, modify, > and adapt than auditing and hex-editing binary executables? (well, > you asked..) > It's really the added weight of Inkscape et al. as build-deps > which makes me not mind the risk of slightly stale icons too much. It really depends on your skill set as to which is easier, but neither pre-built graphics or pre-built executables are source or the preferred form for modification. The particular downside of not building graphics every time is that eventually you find out that at some point something changed and you can no longer reproducibly build them or they do build but look completely different. Or your separate repository for the sources goes missing and you have to recreate from scratch if you want to modify them. If you build with every upload you notice that sooner. This especially true for renderings of 3D scenes. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
