On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 04:16:25PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Karl Hasselström wrote: > > 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? > > Yes, but that assumes you release often. Otherwise users get an old > version of the packaging all the time. Well, stgit does not require so much packaging change for each release. The current debian/ dir in the git repo, while not 100% uptodate, still allows anyone to build snapshots. Best regards, -- Yann -- 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
