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 (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Maintainer (www.debian.org)
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers