Re: Nitpicking: you are doing it wrong
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Jakub Wilk <email@example.com> wrote:
> Dear reviewers, next time if you are going to complain about:
> - debian/compat being "too low";
There are cases where it should be bumped , support for old
versions gets removed. Many sponsors take the approach "What should be
done eventually must be done immediately." From the debhelper manpage
"Unless otherwise indicated, all debhelper documentation assumes that
you are using the most recent compatibility level, and in most cases
does not indicate if the behavior is different in an earlier
compatibility level, so if you are not using the most recent
compatibility level, you're advised to read below for notes about what
is different in earlier compatibility levels."
"v8 This is the recommended mode of operation."
You're right, it says recommended - not required, but sponsors will
ask you to do every "recommended," "should," or "--pedantic -I".
> - debian/rules not using dh (or not using cdbs);
Some sponsors are only comfortable sponsoring dh or cdbs. You are free
to do what ever you'd like (you can even write the rules file with no
debhelper commands at all) but the sponsors are also free to ask you
to change it to what they are comfortable with. You can always find a
sponsor that is more comfortable with your style and work with them as
well. Right now, the general consensus is the dh and cdbs produce
debian packages that are easier to maintain in the long run (if the
sponsor has to take over maintenance of the package or if NMUs are
required in the future.)
> - debian/copyright not in DEP-5 format;
This is accepted and will be policy soon . "What should be done
eventually must be done immediately."
> - source format not 3.0 (quilt) when there are no patches whatsoever;
3.0 (quilt) doesn't just handle patches, it has other features as well
. Even if you aren't interested in those features, and even if you
don't have patches, that doesn't mean the person who will NMU your
package two years from now won't want to add a patch, and NMU's should
be changing source formats.
"What should be done eventually must be done immediately."
> please think twice. Most likely, you are doing it wrong.
You're right that none of these are serious problems in a package that
would prevent it from being useful or in the archive, but neither are
the lintian --pedantic or -I warnings that sponsors ask to have fixed.
The sponsors are picky for a reason (namely to have complete, robust,
and somewhat standardized packaging to make QA, NMUs, and long term
maintenance easier,) if you don't like their approaches you are free
to work closely with another sponsor.