On 04/05/2013 12:38 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: > Jean-Christophe Dubacq <jean-christophe.dub...@ens-lyon.org> writes: > >> Yesterday, however, I just had the case of a project with no tarballs >> (as the library I wanted to package is part of a larger project, it's >> not released independently). I stumbled (too long) on having a good >> workflow for this (I ended up tagging myself the upstream tree). > Using git archive to generate a tarball from upstream is something that I > do in some cases as well. It all depends on upstream's release process. > I default to using released tarballs if they exist and are useful, but I > fall back to git archive when they're not.
Opposite way for me. If there are (signed) tags, I use them first. Upstream tarballs are most of the time compressed with gzip, which is lame. They aren't PGP signed like a git tag may be. Plus why should I bother downloading a tarball when I already have the upstream code stored on my HDD? > This means that the tarball Debian uses doesn't match > upstream, which is a drawback Why? I think that we're hitting the fetishism that Joey was talking about in his blog post ... ;) (please don't take the above "fetishism" word too seriously, I'm half kidding...) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/515dc87b.1010...@debian.org
