Stephen Frost wrote:
> I agree with this. Really, debian-native packages are debian-specific
> packages. I would strongly encourage you to *not* make this a
> debian-native package.
I also agree. I am both upstream and Debian maintainer for my package,
and I find that a non-native package has many advantages:
* We don't need to make a new "upstream" tarball for changes that only
affect Debian.
* Each Debian package is clearly based on a specific, cross-platform
upstream version.
* Non-native packages make it slightly easier for other Debian
developers to make changes and NMUs.
* If the upstream source tarball contains the "official" Debian
directory, users who compile their own versions from tarballs or CVS
will generate .debs with the same versions as the official packages.
If you do want to maintain your "debian" directory in the upstream
source, I suggest you use one of these strategies:
1. Maintain the debian directory in the upstream CVS, but strip it out
when you generate release tarballs. Use the .diff.gz to restore it
in the Debian source package.
2. Maintain the debian directory in the upstream source, but use
"unofficial" versions and control files. Replace them with the
official versions in the .diff.gz.
