On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 01:09:43PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 09/04/21 at 12:33 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:42:22AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > I don't think there's a valid technical reason to not use a newer format. > > > Some dislike the choices made and the fact that many new features are > > > coupled to the new format, but there's really nothing that you could do > > > with the old format than you can't do now with new ones. > > > > I suspect people resent being chastised to "separate patches" as the > > toolage used to scream at you when using 3.0 + single-debian-patch. > > Can you give an example?
Recently fixed so it's no longer a concern in Bullseye -- that's why I said "used to", in past tense. Still, a lot of developers use Buster and older on their boxes. IIRC such messages were given by: * patch header * lintian * mentors.debian.net But even if the messages are gone now, people still remember being told so. Another sometimes mentioned downside of 3.0+s-d-p is doubling the debian/ directory if it's present in upstream releases. I believe this is a bogus reason as all these files are supposed to be tiny. Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ .--[ Makefile ] ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ # beware of races ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ all: pillage burn ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ `----
