Hi,
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
Is there a consolidated list of concerns about 3.0 (quilt) somewhere?
Not to my best knowledge.
The only technical concern that I'm aware of is that it doesn't work for
the workflow of debia...@lists.debian.org, they like to use quilt to
maintain long-lived patches and use the .diff.gz to collate upstream
patches that they apply with git cherry-pick. The advantage being that
they don't have to maintain those cherry-picked patches explicitly, they
go away automatically when they package the next upstream release.
Their workflow is entirely git based, they have the upstream history
in their repository.
Apart from that the other objections are not really actionnable, they
are more in the domain of personal preference and/or dislike of quilt
in general.
You will always have people who dislike the format, and even
some in the technical committe (thinking of Ian Jackson here).
Would it be possible to not display the tag in case the package fits in
one of the cases where we know that 3.0 (quilt) is considered unsuitable
by many?
If the case could be computably detected yes. But we need to know the case
where it is unsuitable.
FWIW, there's already a missing-debian-source-format info tag which plays
somewhat the role of the reminder that they need to opt-in in 3.0
(quilt).
You can get in touch with people who opted explicitly to put 1.0 in
debian/source/format to know their reasons...
http://lintian.debian.org/tags/missing-debian-source-format.html
Have a look at the long description, the message is rather explicit. :-)
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-lint-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130901183432.ga28...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com
