Hi Simon,

On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 9:12 PM Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow, you are changing the Source package name, so this
> would go into NEW and effectively be a new package, doesn't it?  What do
> you think about just forking this repository into a new Salsa project
> for that new name instead?  The old package won't magically go away, and
> having two packages in the PTS that points to the same Salsa project
> seems confusing.  It will mean the PTS will complain it is out of sync
> with git for the old package.

Good point. Thank you for point it out.

> -Upstream-Name: go-spiffe
> +Upstream-Name: github.com/spiffe/go-spiffe/v2
>
> This looks weird.  Do that really match the intention behind
> debian/copyright Upstream-Name?
>
> https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#upstream-name-field
>
> It looks more like you are using this for something Go-related?  The
> upstream project name seems to be 'go-spiffe', not the entire namespace.

Good point as well.

I think we already have a lot of packages needs to update. We should
limit the scope for this sprint in phase 1 and 2. We shouldn't bring
too much other unrelated things in this sprint otherwise it will be
unable to finish. :D

I will revert my changes and let's do this kind of clean up in another
phase maybe with helps from lintian warning.

Best regards,

-Andrew

Reply via email to