Quoting Enrico Zini (2019-05-15 11:31:46) > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 02:30:52PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > > > How do we feel about people making build system conversions when > > those conversion make it easier to fix some other bug that they are > > fixing as part of an NMU? > > That is, imagine that a package is mishandling the combination of > > systemd units and an init script. As someone preparing an NMU, is > > it reasonable to move to dh compat 12 from some other build system > > if I believe doing so will make it easier for me to fix the bug and > > verify the fix? > > I see various scenarios: > > - if a package is generally actively maintained, except the > maintainer is currently unresponsive for some reason and there is a > RC bug to fix, I could understand frowning upon a build system > conversion in an NMU. > > - if a package has bugs that can all be fixed trivially with a build > system conversion, I would see no reason not to do such a > conversion, even in an NMU. > > - a change of build system in a complex package would be more > controversial than in a trivial package. > > - if a package has had an inactive and unresponsive maintainer for a > long time, it would indeed be a case for salvaging. > > I could however imagine someone having enough energy to dust off > old packages in the archive, while not having enough energy to pick > up maintenance of lots of old dusty packages. > > I would consider the idea of salvaging+orphaning, like following > the salvaging procedure but setting the maintainer to qa instead. > > - I'd say that orphaned packages can be uncontroversially be > converted to dh.
Very well said. I agree ith all of it. > With a consensus of having dh as the default build system, and the > understanding that some packages have good reasons not to use dh, I'd > like a way to tell when a package is not using dh for a reason, from > when a package is not using dh because the maintainer has not gotten > around to it yet. > > I'd propose to recommend dh as the default build system, and document > in README.source if there are reasons to use something else. > > At that point, one could look at README.source to see if changing > build system would be an possible strategy for fixing bugs in an NMU. Great suggestion! - 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
