Am Sonntag, den 25.04.2010, 09:27 +0200 schrieb Reinhard Tartler:
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 23:05:29 (CEST), Harry Rickards wrote:
> > There is a lintian warning with lives - missing-debian-source-format.
> > This is fixed by adding a debian/source/format. Should I put '1.0' in
> > the file or put '3.0 (quilt)' and switch to 3.0. Does this just
> > involve removing the '--with-quilt' from debian/rules, removing the
> > build depend on quilt and removing README.source?
> this has been recently discussed on this list, mainly between jonas and
> me. Jonas was a strong proponent of format 3.0, while I think
> git-buildpackage is not ready (enough) for it.
> As a compromise, Jonas proposed to unpatch in the 'clean' rules such that
> a 'debclean' returns the working copy to a state that is ready to be
> examined with 'git status'/'git commit' commands.
> While I can live with this compromise, I'm not very fond of having
> different sets of packages with different packaging policies under our
> team umbrella. We currently have some packages in dh6-style, some in
> dh7, some in cdbs, and this format discussion is adding yet another
> dimension of variability. So if we agree on moving to format 3.0, I
> think we should properly document this and convert all packages
> gradually.

Let's discuss a packaging policy for our team. My favorite would be dh7
and dpkg-source 3.0 format. We shouldn't enforce the switch to
dpkg-source 3.0 right now. Instead we should switch once the uploader
thinks that the tools are ready for 3.0.

Other opinions?

Benjamin Drung
Ubuntu Developer ( | Debian Maintainer (

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to