On 2008-08-28 11:09:29 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Whatever people told you guys, the sad truth is that for the
> overwhelming majority of packages, the mere presence of a debian/
> dir upstream is taken as a warning sign by any seasoned Debian
> developer (i.e. it is so often a problem, we take it as a bad sign).
> It almost never helps. I have no idea where stgit is in that regard,
> though. And I have NOT checked the "upstream version of the Debian
> packaging", so please don't take this personally.
>
> But I can tell you that most DDs would prefer that upstream dumped
> the debian/ dir, unless it is kept *really* current. And really, at
> that point, you are losing a lot of the benefits of a downstream
> maintainer anyway (i.e. you are not delegating the whole issue to
> him, so that you can ignore the packaging and just pay attention to
> stgit itself).
>
> Of course, this changes a lot when upstream is also a Debian
> developer and spends a few hours per week keeping up-to-date with
> Debian policy and toolset changes, etc.
So the optimal solution if we want to carry a debian/ directory (to
allow users to easily build their own .debs, or whatnot) would maybe
be to simply politely ask our Debian maintainer to send us patches or
pull requests to keep it up-to-date?
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
