Osamu Aoki wrote: >> I don't see a reason to document dput *instead of* dupload. Maybe it'd be >> better to document dput *in addition to* dupload? > > This is tutorial document. We should avoid documenting all. My recent > addition to the debhelper packaging tutorial section with recent > capabilities made this document big enough. My thought is switch weight > between dput and dupload. I am not goint to drop dupload completely. >
Thanks for explanation. Just in case, here is some my thoughts. Not many time ago I was reading maint-guide to learn how to make my first Debian package. Indeed, first pair of times it was totally new for me, but very soon I got stuck at things that were not documented there. Some people of communities which I participated in often argue that Debian maint-guide is shorter than it can be. Also, you mentioned dput's additional features, but for novices they are too complex: uploads to mentors.d.n and official Debian archive (in case of DM) should be signed, plus dupload have fully suitable config entries for them out of the box. My 2 eurocents. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
