Hello, On Fri 29 Mar 2024 at 01:44am GMT, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 09:28:44AM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote: >> On Thu 14 Mar 2024 at 01:29pm GMT, Jonathan Dowland wrote: >> > I took a peek, out of curiosity. I was surprised not to find a >> > orig.tar.gz / debian.tar.gz split; the package version scheme >> > properly reflects a normal (non-native) package (1.2.3-1), but >> > the source tarball has "./debian" in it; and indeed, it looks >> > like you're managing the debian packaging in the upstream repo. >> > It's advisable to keep the two separate. >> >> Not everyone agrees with this. I think that same repo, non-native >> versioning is often what's best for a package. > > While it's true that some people do hold that position, the problem with > it has always been that it gets extremely cumbersome the moment that > maintenance of the Debian packaging passes to somebody who doesn't have > upstream commit access. This event is traditionally followed by > cursing. I've been on both sides of this -- upstream maintainer doing Debian packaging, and adopting a package previously maintained by its upstream -- and I really appreciated the simplicity in the former role, and found it just one of the various small tasks involved in adopting the package in the latter role. I think it's easier now we treat source packages as an output format, thanks to git. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
