On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 07:29:21PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 04:34:29PM -0700, Sam Powers wrote: > > Is it a good idea to keep a debian directory upstream? I have CVS access, > > so I think it'd make it easier for me, and also for others who want to > > build custom debs, if the debian files were in CVS. > > > If anyone who's gone this route before has any tips, I'd appreciate > > hearing from them. > > If you treat the package as a native package, this ties your hands and > the hands of your upstream, because Debian-specific changes must then be > tied to upstream releases. > > If you don't treat the package as a native package, having a debian > directory upstream can be high maintenance, because every time your > changes to this directory are incorporated upstream, you have to rework > your Debian diff.gz to account for this. > > I generally think having debian/ upstream is more trouble than it's > worth. The one package I work on that carries a debian/ directory > upstream puts it elsewhere, where it doesn't conflict with official > Debian work.
I keep a debian/ directory in the upstream CVS for TICS, but it never
appears in a release tarball; building is done by making a release tarball
from the CVS, then building a package using that as the 'orig', so that
it generates a suitable .diff.gz file.
It also means that Debian-specific changes do not necessitate a new
release of the 'upstream' tarball; only patches that affect upstream.
The relevant section of the CVS repository can be viewed at:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/tics/tics/debian/
Bugs welcome, file them on Sourceforge (since I have no intention of
bringing this to Debian native until it's reached 1.0 and is actually
useful to someone other than the development team).
--
***************************************************************************
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
msg07294/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
