On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 10:56:43AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.8.3.0 > Severity: wishlist > > Hi, > > Given the recent thread in debian-devel[1], I think we should document in > policy that packages that are not tightly related to Debian shouldn't be > native.
*sigh* So I spent a whole subthread trying to explain that I think this is *not* true, and seemed to get consensus on that, and now you want to get this into policy? Gee. Whether or not a native package makes sense should be the maintainer's prerogative, not decided by policy. As I said in the thread on -devel, there can be good reasons for making a package native. E.g., the maintainer doesn't have to deal with two releases (one upstream and one for debian) for every code change, but can just do one; there is immediate use of a translation team; releases are at least tested on Debian's architectures when they are released; etc. There are also obvious downsides to doing so, and it's probably a good idea to document these somewhere (though I doubt policy is the place for that; this is more something for the devref). However, outright claiming that it should not be done, will a) make a bunch of packages insta-buggy (which is bad, as far as policy is concerned), and b) is not the right thing to do, IMO. > The motivations for discouraging native packages not Debian specific are > that it makes it harder for other parties to make advantage of it. While I agree that there are downsides to non-debian specific native packages, I disagree that this is a correct example: > For example, they would find new "upstream" releases that fixed Debian > packaging bugs, or that were NMUs. They can perfectly well ignore those. > Also, where should they report bugs? In bugs.debian.org? Yes, why not? > Native packages make sense when the package is pretty much only useful > for Debian (and Debian derivatives), e.g. dpkg or apt, but not for unrelated > packages. They can make sense, and it should be the maintainer's prerogative to make that decision. Having a package be a native package when it is not Debian specific does not harm either Debian or the Free Software community at large; it only influences the workflow of the Debian maintainer, and that of non-Debian packagers of the software, if any. It is okay to point out what the effect will be of making a package native, so that a maintainer knows what he's getting him- or herself into. It is not okay to force a particular workflow on a maintainer just because *you* think it's not a good workflow. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
