Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> 1) We should move to new source package format (3.0 etc) that remove the
> need for patch system altogether.
Ehem, it actually uses the patch system, difference is that it is no longer
under the control of the rules file.
>
> 2) Documentation for debian/README.source for dpatch and quilt is useful,
> and it can be simply supplied in /usr/share/doc/{dpatch,quilt}. Then
> debian/README.source only need to say that we use dpatch as documented
> in /usr/share/doc/dpatch/README.source.gz.
-1, a README.source pointing to dpatch's README.source is useless and is a
waste of time for the maintainer, the sponsor (in case the maintainer needs
one), and the NMUer or anyone else who takes a look at the source package.
If it is as simple as pointing to the patch system's README.source any
competent person should be able to take a look at /usr/share/doc/<patch
sys>/ if she or he doesn't already know how it works.
>
> 3) If a package is lacking debian/README.source, then one should expect
> that the source is ready to be used. If it not the case, even an empty
> debian/README.source is better than none.
>
What would an empty README.source file mean?
Cheers,
--
Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer
www.debian.org - get.debian.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
