Andreas Barth <a...@not.so.argh.org> writes: > Option 1 also implies forcing debian/rules to be a Makefile, which is > think is sensible.
Policy already requires this. The only package in the archive for which this is not already the case is "leave". I don't like option #3 because it's something we'll be stuck with forever and requires packagers update both debian/rules and debian/control to configure things properly. One of the reasons why I'm personally fond of #4 is that it reduces our long-term complexity. #3 increases our long-term complexity, I think unnecessarily. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
