Tollef Fog Heen <tfh...@err.no> writes: > I wasn't trying to imply that my idea was new. :-)
Sorry. :) I wasn't clear enough that I figured you probably knew the history. > Yes, this is a lot of work, and I'm not sure what the best way to go > about it would be. On the other hand, I think we're not actually > shipping the real source if we're not shipping that metadata. The most > useful definition of source I've seen is the «preferred format for > modification» one, and if we need or prefer something outside the source > package to do useful things with it (such as looking at what patches are > applied, who wrote them and when), the source package is not the real > source. Yes, definitely agreed. I would really like the model in which we just ship around Git repositories as our source. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ehh3u8k6....@windlord.stanford.edu
