Hi, Quoting Simon McVittie (2023-08-06 12:27:04) > On Sat, 05 Aug 2023 at 21:29:08 +0200, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > > I expect all Python packages that ship > > $name.egg-info and don't remove it in clean and don't exclude it via > > extend-diff-ignore (all of which is unneeded busywork even if recommended) > > to behave the same. > > Python packages that *don't* ship $name.egg-info in their upstream source, > don't remove it in clean and don't exclude it via extend-diff-ignore will > also fail Lucas' test if they are 3.0 (quilt) format (or presumably will > have unintended diff instead if they are format 1.0). That's the only reason > bmap-tools_3.6-2 was on Lucas' list, for example.
I just had #1045290 filed against a Python package of mine: > dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are: > plakativ-0.5.1/plakativ.egg-info/SOURCES.txt since this issue seems to be affecting a few more packages than plakativ, I wanted to ask here what the canonical way is to fix this issue? Thanks! cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
