On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > > A proper lintian warning can enlighten the maintainer and push him > > toward the change or somehow qualify the NMUer to add that file (if > > there are no other big changes) > > There's no reason to have a debian/source/format in a classic debian > package. The default is well defined. I strongly oppose the idea of > having lintian complain about that even more.
It depends on your definition of default. The historical default of dpkg is well defined but it's no longer the default format used by Debian maintainers since we have a very large majority of 3.0 (quilt): http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/dpkg-v3/ Keeping the historical default means that newcomers will keep doing the mistake of creating 1.0 source packages when we want them to create 3.0 (quilt/native) packages. What is so horrible in the idea of making an explicit choice of source format? Can we have a reasonable discussion based on real arguments and not on personal feelings? Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140715084305.gc14...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com
