Panu Kalliokoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I understand this, but it was exactly the same situation as with my > software packages -- they didn't have separate packaging and "upstream" > changes. There have been two times in their history when only packaging > information has been changed: when I added packaging for the first time, > and when I incorporated the fixes proposed on -mentors. Other packaging > changes have always been accompanied with changes in the software > itself. Note that technically even Debian specific packages can quite > easily be separated into packaging-related and other stuff.
But there is no such separation even in non-native packages. The .diff.gz file may not only contain packaging related stuff but also patches to the content of the package. And for native Debian packages it probably really does not make sense to supply patches to the source. On the other hand I don't see the benefit in the distinction between native and non-native packages. I don't think the overhead would be too terrible if native packages were treated the same as non-native ones. But, I could see a benefit from separating packaging information from the source. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
