Bug#593909: debian-policy: Clarifications about the syntax of Debian control files.

Package: debian-policy Version: 3.9.1.0 Severity: wishlist Dear all, I have been reading §5.1 (Syntax of control files) many times recently, and would like propose clarifications about a couple of points. If consensus emerges, I will write a patch. Non-wrappable field values

Build-depends for arch independent files

I have a question about packages like antelope. Its dependency line says: Build-Depends: debhelper (= 7), cdbs, default-jdk, maven-repo-helper, ant, docbook-xsl, xsltproc and it is an Architecture: all package. No architecture specific files are built here. The policy says in 7.1: This means

Re: Build-depends for arch independent files

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 at 20:22:17 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: This means that architecture restrictions must not be used in binary relationship fields for architecture-independent packages (Architecture: all). This just forbids the following: Architecture: all Depends: hello

Re: Build-depends for arch independent files

Simon McVittie s...@debian.org writes: On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 at 20:22:17 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: I have a question about packages like antelope. Its dependency line says: Build-Depends: debhelper (= 7), cdbs, default-jdk, maven-repo-helper, ant, docbook-xsl, xsltproc

Bug#593611: Acknowledgement (debian-policy: Clarify whose signature should go in debian/changelog (4.4))

Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org writes: I don't quite like the notion of primarily responsible for the preparation of this version, it's rather blur for packages that are team maintained. In fact, the uploader might be the one who has done the least... I think it's clearer to use Ben