|--==> Felipe Sateler writes: FS> On Wednesday 01 August 2007 18:47:22 Free Ekanayaka wrote: FS> Import the upstream source to the "upstream" branch. >> >>We generally avoid importing the upstream source to save space. >> FS> Remove non-free stuff from the source in the "dfsg-clean" branch. >> >>That's interesting, I've never maintained a package for which I had to >>prune the upstream source from non-free parts. Is this the case with >>sound?
FS> Yes, because csound used to be under a non-free license, but changed to LGPL FS> later on. However some of the opcodes could not be relicensed because the FS> original author could not be reached/didn't want to relicense. I'm not sure FS> how repacked sources can be managed without importing them into svn. What about a script that converts the original upstream tarball in a dfsg-clean one? The script could be kept under SVN and be run against new upstream releases to obtain the dfsg-clean equivalent (that's more or less what the kernel team does with the original linux tarball, which is not dfsg-clean). >> FS> Do the actual packaging in the "master" branch. >> FS> I'm not sure if this is possible in subversion, or if you are using a FS> different schema. Apparently you are only saving the debian/ >>subfolder in FS> svn. >> >>I generally create draft source package and then: FS> A draft source package is an empty one? No, just an initial version of the package, typically obtained by running dh_make and deleting the useless stuff. >> >>svn-inject -o package.dsc svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/demudi >> >>If I need to change the upstream code, I'm always keeping the patches >>under debian/patches. FS> I'm doing that too (I use dpatch), but that doesn't work for repacked sources. Ciao, Free -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
