There are two different things to be considered here: 1. dpkg-source supports pristine source. Is Eloy aware of this? (I'm not completely sure when he says that "samba_2.0.3.orig.tar.gz must untar in samba-2.0.3.orig").
2. A CVS artifact inside a tarball is ugly. A source which is not pristine is ugly too. Which one is more ugly? In cases like this, IMHO, the maintainer should be able to have the final say about it. For the record: latest procmail release had also a CVS artifact inside the tarball, which I have removed in the .orig.tar.gz (this is documented in the copyright file). I consider this as a bug in the original tarball which is fixed in the Debian version, so in this case I would not consider as a bug that the .orig.tar.gz is not pristine. Thanks. -- "12a2139aa7dab9a05c86927502d9abee" (a truly random sig)
