Quoting Marc Haber (2026-02-12 15:32:20) > On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 01:28:29PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >Quoting Marc Haber (2026-02-12 12:35:15) > >> If using the signed git tag would result in a different orig.tar.gz in > >> our archive then we SHOULD be sad (or improve our tools) and in the > >> mean time use their release tarball (while optionally keeping upstream > >> git history in our git). > > > >I agree with the other cases (and thanks to spelling them all out > >explicitly!), but I don't understand the above one. > > > >Why SHOULD we we sad if upstream offers two formats and we pick one of > >them without being able to recreate the other from it? > > Because we would then have an orig.tar.gz in our archive that isn't > that original. I would be less unhappy if our archive would then use a > different name such as synth.tar.gz or debian-upstream.tar.gz, but I > think that hell would need to freeze over for that to happen.
Ah, I think I now understand what you are getting at: Debian SHOULD only include "orig" to the naming of a compressed tarball when it originates upstream *in that container and compression formats*. I don't find that problematic: The "orig" naming is not (that I am aware) documented anywhere as being a promise about bit-for-bit accuracy after containerization and compression. As I see it, our naming scheme is merely a convention that can reasonably be extended to cover tree-same originating upstream - i.e. original _content_ but not necessarily orginal containerization nor compression. It if was problematic, then I believe we have already a lot of broken packages in Debian - all those with "+ds" or "+dfsg" in the name but also with "orig" near the end of the name. Those are explicitly *not* bit-for-bit upstream-containerized-and-compressed originals. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
