Hello, On 23-08-2010, Ralf Treinen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 03:07:02PM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: >> On 22-08-2010, Ralf Treinen <[email protected]> wrote: > > [...] >> > What is the reason to mandate a special field or comment in the META >> > field when it is created by debian? We are patching sources all the time >> > both for end user applications and develpment packages, without attaching >> > an extra warning sign. What makes META files so special that warrants >> > an exception to that rule? >> > >> >> Whenever you patch the source, IMHO, you limit the patch to: >> - fix the build system to make it compile on Debian (source -> binary >> package, new OCaml version) >> - fix security bugs > > Certainly not. We do add features (I am speaking here of debian packages > in general, not only of ocaml libraries), and we fix things that are > broken. >
Could you be more precise about the features we add. I don't have examples in mind. I don't consider that FHS compliance is a feature for example but I don't see any commmon case where Debian packagers add a new function to a library. At the beginning, I was adding wrapper scripts to mldonkey (create/delete users, set password) and I had been criticized for this because I was adding too advanced features... Regards, Sylvain Le Gall -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
