On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 02:12:13AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I'm definitely not even going to consider removal of extraction support, > > because that would break at least historic source unpacking. That's > > the price of adding these kinds of features into dpkg.
> > When it comes to deprecation of the packing, see above. When I saw this > > thread I initially though that at least adding options to forbid packing > > and unpacking this kind of source would be a nice compromise, but with > > the ctte being involved I've lost any motivation for that. > > In any case I'm not even sure why dpkg is any kind of blocker for this > > at all, because acceptance into the Debian archive is controlled by > > ftp-masters, f.ex via lintian and its auto-reject list. Well, it might > > be if there's some kind of intention to try to block this even for other > > unrelated derivatives… > I'm detaching dpkg from this, I don't see anything constructive to do > out if this, TBH. > If someone wants to see dpkg changed in some way related to this, I'd > request the same thing I did to Ian a couple of years ago, gather > input from derivatives and other current users, on their reasons for > using it, or start a discussion with them on whether they'd be > satisfied with potential alternatives, etc. I will limit myself to pointing out the asymmetry of this requirement: Ubuntu as a derivative was not consulted before ubuntu.series was inflicted on us, but other derivatives who like this feature must be consulted before upstream will un-break it for Ubuntu. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
