On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 10:13:49PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > #250202: [PROPOSAL] "debian/README.source" file for packages with > non-trivial source > > Bleh. This is kind of a mess. > > I don't like the last wording proposal in that it advocates strongly > against using quilt or dpatch, which as near as I can tell from other > Debian mailing list discussion and packaging teams are widely considered > best practices inside Debian even though they don't immediately give you > editable source.
It does not advocate against quilt/dpatch: you can use quilt or dpatch and provide editable source. It is just a matter of having clean depend on 'patch' instead of 'unpatch'. Anyway as long as people are using packaged patch system instead of custom one, reading the build-depends is usually sufficient to deal with the package. > #65577: [Amended] copyright should include notice if a package is not a > part of Debian distribution > > I think this is a great idea and should be done. However, I don't think > it's currently being done with contrib and non-free packages, so it's one > of the standard Policy chicken-and-egg situations. I'm in favor of > applying this at the recommendation level (instead of the should that's in > the current wording). Another issue is that packages that are not in the Debian archive are not bound by policy. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
