In <1242149210.3959.13.ca...@localhost>, Kristis Makris wrote: >> > Debian is not the only distribution this system is packaged for. I >> > don't like to have a top-level directory called "debian" in the source >> > code repository. Instead, I have a directory called packaging/debian. >> There is no need to have debian packaging things in upstream. >I disagree.
Well, then you are wrong. There is certainly never a *need* to have the Debian packaging upstream. A desire, perhaps misguided, sure; but, never a *need*. If it is a native package, there is no upstream. If it is a non-native package the packaging is versioned separately from the upstream. This removes one of the concerns that might drive one to maintain them together. The Debian packaging may involves Debian-specific patches, and may need to change with the Debian policy which upstream shouldn't need to worry about. Separating the packaging commands is an advantage here. Most of the people downloading your release tarballs won't be building a Debian package. Most of those that are building a Debian package will already have access to the packaging commands, outside of your release tarball. If any changes that Debian (or Debian-derivatives) need to make any changes to your package, various tools may complain. At the very least, there will be spurious diffs. If you want to maintain a debian/ directory in your upstream VCS and provide your own .debs and/or apt repository then, by all means, do so. However, please don't include the debian/ directory in your release tarballs so they don't get in the way of the official Debian (or Ubuntu or Knoppix or whatever) packaging. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
