On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:07:21AM +0100, Stuart Prescott wrote:
- if the transformation can be expressed as a script, use "debian/rules get-orig-source"Since the purpose of the get-orig-source target seems to have become unclear over time, this doesn't sound like a good plan to me. The particular problems with this target are summarised inhttp://bugs.debian.org/466550The main conclusion of the discussion there was that the get-orig-source target should probably go away. To summarise (roughly, apologies to those whose pet argument is omitted):
I only briefly skimmed that bugreport but feel that you summarise wrongly: The currently last message[1] and earlier posts like it voices what is also sane to me: get-orig-source makes no sense if interpreted as get-whatever-source-is-currently-latest, but makes great sense if instead interpreted as get-source-for-current-packaging.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=466550#224
* Why is the target is supposed to _fetch_ the most recent version (policy ยง4.9)? We have uscan for that already.* What does "orig" mean anyway? "orig" meaning the source for the current package you're working on or "orig" meaning the next upstream source? (i.e. is this duplicating apt-get source or uscan?)* what does "orig" mean in the context of a repackaged tarball?Basically, get-orig-source currently overlaps with one or both of uscan and apt-get source.It would seem that at best get-orig-source is poorly named; is there really a sane way of changing its meaning to really mean make-repackaged-source?
All of above oddities evaporate when interpreting "get-orig-source" as "get-the-source-corresponding-to-current-packaging".
Yeah, it still serves similar purpose as "apt-get source" - the latter works only for sources registered in an APT source, however.
- Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
