Hi Johannes, * Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <[email protected]> [2024-11-30 23:55]:
I am not fundamentally opposed to switching the default. But if it is switched, then there should be good reasons which should be explained in an entry to the NEWS file.
I am not sure if the reason needs to be in NEWS but I would be happy if that would unstuck sbuild!71.
$ apt-get source hello $ cd hello-2.10 $ dch -i
$ dch -i fake
$ touch debian/foobar $ dpkg-source -b . $ diffoscope ../hello_2.10-3.dsc ../hello_2.10-3.1.dsc [...] -rw-r--r-- 0 0 0 964 2022-12-26 15:30:00.000000 debian/control -rw-r--r-- 0 0 0 2264 2022-12-26 15:30:00.000000 debian/copyright +-rw-r--r-- 0 0 0 0 2024-11-30 22:46:47.000000 debian/foobar -rwxr-xr-x 0 0 0 141 2022-12-26 15:30:00.000000 debian/rules -rwxr-xr-x 0 0 0 798 2022-12-26 15:30:00.000000 debian/rules-old That. The hypothetical debian/foobar could be something created by running the full build or parts of the build locally. Those things are usually (if there is no bug) removed by the clean target. These days, our packages are mostly in git repos, so we can use "git clean -fdx" to even remove files that a buggy clean target would miss. Which is why it's pointless to let sbuild clean the source if you are working with git-buildpackage. But not everybody is. So if you switch the default then you break some user's setups.
This is just as well an example why running clean is not enough as it only works for files that are actually cleaned and assumes that the developer actually uses sbuild to generate the upload. I think we should advice people to rather use gbp or dgit for that.
Would adding a warning similar to the chroot-mode one so people can prepare for the default switch work for you?
Cheers Jochen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
