On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:01:25 -0500 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pristine sources are already a desired, but not required, > characteristic. There are enough brain dead upstream packaging > practices that we can not mandate pristine sources. Dont go blaming "upstream" for debians problems, lots of other distro's ship pristine sources, thats a poor excuse. As far as i know, the problem is that our packaging tools cant handle the common tar.bz2 format, or having seperate patches. There was talk of a python based dpkg-source2 that had the features to make this possible, > This would be an undue burden on a number of packages. Have > you done a survey to see how many packages would be affected? What > purpose would be served by this target that is not already served by > recording the upstream source location in the copyright file? If we > do not ship pristine sources, it is unlikely that we would be able > to generate a cryptographically pristine set by this mechanism > anyway. The purpose it would serve is greater transparency, which promotes trust. Glenn
