Yaroslav Halchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I don't see anything which requires debian/ directory to be absent > from the orig.tar.gz
You are right, there is no such "law". But still it's a bad idea. > especially if a package maintainer is the upstream. This isn't an argument for inclusion of the debian directory (will you release a new upstream version just because you need to change a build-depends and trigger a rebuild on the Debian buildds?). > And also I don't see any strict requirement > (although I understand that it is desired) to don't use native > versioning schema for not-only-for-debian packages. I don't see this written out specifically, either, but I think this is implied. For example, 3.2.1 talks about native packages: ,---- | Native Debian packages (i.e., packages which have been written | especially for Debian) whose version numbers include dates should | always use the "YYYYMMDD" format. `---- > I think that policy/dev-ref is not clear on that at the moment, that is > why relevant questions come up from time to time. Yes, but the answers given are always the same: Try to avoid a debian/ directory in the upstream sources. It's in the archives. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)
