On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:08:22PM -0500, David Welton wrote: > I think that as many packages as reasonably possible should migrate > towards them. They work pretty well, but I don't believe in forcing > them on people if they are really opposed.
So even if we did decide to do what you suggest, I am free to hand-roll my rules files like I've done since I joined[1]? [1] with one exception, which did not last long:-) > Do you seem what I mean? I see broken debian/rules files that should be fixed. I see no reasons for mandating debhelper (although I agree that using one of the helper tools may make it easier for the maintainer to fix these). I probably have such rules files myself, but I correct them - in my own way that does not involve any helper packages - if I notice them (for example, if you report a bug about it). > I'm not just talking about debhelper, but about rules files in > general. I think using debhelper is one part of this. I am with you in demanding well-written debian/rules files. I am not with you in saying that debhelper is the way to fix these - it's *a* way, sure, but not the only one, and you must be careful in not blaming people for not using debhelper. > Policy is not the be all and end all of Debian - frankly, it doesn't > interest me much. How so? You are here proposing Debian policy, you're just doing it on -devel. > It's a general problem that manifests itself in > different ways that are difficult to discuss on a general level. Then give us specific examples. You did this in this message, which is good. > And > yet, it's good to at least talk about it at this level so as to try > and come up with a set of good guidelines to go by before going out > and doing a package by package combing of Debian. It is hard to discuss a problem which is not clearly defined (either by general definition or by specific examples) -- %%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%% "" (John Cage)
