On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:21:54PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 17:13:03 (CEST), Felipe Sateler wrote:On 02/09/10 05:10, Reinhard Tartler wrote:So another approach would be to repackage the tarball to just include the COPYING file. While we are at it, we could also use the new Makefile and get rid of the other patch.Instead of using a quilt patch should I simply replace the Makefile with the new one and check that into the master branch?no, that would be pretty confusing. I'd rather do these changes in the 'upstream' branch branch, and have a wiimote-0.3.1.dfsg1.orig.tar.gz created or something.The correct approach is to have upstream fix this, not us.Indeed.In the current workflow, touching the upstream branch for stuff other than merging upstream versions is wrong IMO.yeah, maybe creating a designated upstream.dfsg branch would be cleaner.
Makes no difference in the end: What is wrong (assuming Felipe agrees with me here) is to *redistribute* non-pristine tarball for reasons other than DFSG violations.
- Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers