Using compat 5 isn't wrong per se, but I did notice the need to modernize the packaging, and discussed this with Eric already. Using newer packaging makes it easier to maintain the package in the long run, as new developers may not know of or understand older tricks. A promise to keep improving the setup is enough for me. :)
As for using native packaging, that seems to me like an invitation to patch the package directly, without a patch system, when there are issues. Using a proper 3.0 (quilt) package would make it easier to separate a formal release's code with any further patches applied (especially when it comes to cherry-picking patches from upstream for upload to stable releases). This will make it much easier for Ubuntu (or Debian) developers to help with the pcp upstream project by sending their patches in a much more obvious way -- no need to dig in the code to figure out what the delta is. Furthermore, any change to the packaging would then need to be done by way of another upstream version -- you'd likely get version numbers that don't match what was officially released upstream for all distros (for example, you could release 5.5.2, but Debian/Ubuntu might ship 5.5.2.4 if some extra changes had to be applied to the packaging). I'm tempted to block inclusion in main on that reason, but I'll confer with my colleagues on the MIR team. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1700827 Title: [MIR] pcp package To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcp/+bug/1700827/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
