Quoting Adrian Bunk (2019-05-14 13:47:02) > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 12:50:54PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 01:12:17PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:30:11AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:22:32PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > >things simple for team mates. I consider it a valid > > > > > > >request to every single maintainer to respect that other > > > > > > >people have good reasons to change her/his package. > > > > > >... > > > > > > > > > > Based on this rationale, Andreas should stop using d-shlibs. > > > > > > > > > > Weird tools on top of dh are not that different from using a > > > > > weird buildsystem when debugging other peoples packages, and > > > > > d-shlibs is something I've seen involved in bugs more than > > > > > once. > > > > > > > > Its the first time that I hear criticism about d-shlibs usage > > > > > > It is fine in the current "maintainer can do anything" world. > > > > Hmmm, I don't get it: I'm using dh and in addition I'm using a tool > > that enforces library packaging policy. > >... > > A tool nearly noone else uses or knows. > > Spending time on trying to understand what such a tool does or why it > is needed in a specific package is not really different from spending > time trying to understand how a buildsystem works. > > If it is generally useful it should be done by debhelper > automatically, otherwise it should not be used at all if the goal is > to make it easier for other people to make changes to your packages.
I like the smell of flexibility - e.g. debhelper offering a baseline on top of which can be sprinkled more exotic tweaks as needed. I dislike the smell of monoculture - e.g. banning or merging into debhelper itself debhelper addon packages. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
