Re: Using cvs-buildpackage to manage debian packages
Daniel Ruoso <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I was thinking if it would be nice to manage the packaging of the
> libraries if we use cvs-buildpackage to maintain the control files
> such as changelog...
> that way we can dump the original sources into pkg-perl cvs every
> time we want to package a new upstream version..
> what do you think?
I have used cvs-buildpackage in the past---and, in fact, use it for
some work-related stuff, where we use CVS to manage our sources and
where, coincidentally, we are building perl modules. ;)
That said, I would advocate using arch (well, tla), rather than CVS,
in combination with tla-buildpackage.
Arch's support for branches and merging is much more sophisticated
than that of CVS, and tla-buildpackage has made managing new upstream
source and NMUs much easier than any other method I have tried (it
certainly *feels* like I've tried them all)---both of which I think
would be a big benefit if we're looking at doing community-supported
Heck, if this sub-project were to decide to use arch, I would
seriously consider putting all of the modules I maintain in this
I was a superman, but looks are deceiving -- Stone Temple Pilots