Manoj Srivastava wrote: > We do not want to have different helper package start inventing > a helper specific way of building ddebs, with no clear standard tha > they are following.
> While archive coverage is nice, ensuring that a ddeb is > properly defined, and that all the different ways of creating ddebs are > consistent, should happen first. OK, so you mean I should document the ddeb format (which is that of .deb packages) and possibly include it in policy? That makes sense, if you want that I'll propose a patch for policy (note that udebs are not documented though). Cheers, Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
