On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 01:33:46PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Lars Wirzenius <[email protected]> writes:
> > On to, 2011-01-13 at 17:15 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > Yeah, I think Source should be optional for native packages. > > Would anyone oppose making such a change? > I maintain the position I argued earlier in this same thread: > The provenance of the source of any Debian package should be recorded > explicitly, and the copyright file is the canonical location for that > information. This is not what Debian Policy as written requires, and it's not appropriate to use a rider in a DEP to bypass the policy process for changing those requirements. Policy only specifies documenting *upstream sources*. > For packages where “it was only ever a Debian native package” is true, > that fact is not obvious and should still be recorded in the same place. This is makework. I agree with Joey and Russ that the Source field should not be mandatory under DEP5. It's fine for tools that enforce Policy (such as lintian) to treat a missing Source field as an error on a non-native package, OTOH. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
