Bug#931975: dpkg-checkbuilddeps don't allow multiple Vcs-Git statements
Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> writes:
>> diff --git a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
>> index 81b3542..d491d57 100644
>> --- a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
>> +++ b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
>> @@ -979,7 +979,10 @@ repository where the Debian source package is developed.
>> or ``hg clone`` command. If no branch is specified, the packaging
>> should be on the default branch.
>>
>> - More than one different VCS may be specified for the same package.
>> + Only one ``Vcs-<type>`` field should be given for a package. If the
>> + package is maintained in multple version control systems, the
>> + maintainer should specify the one that they would prefer other people
>> + to use as the basis for proposing changes to the package.
>>
>> For both fields, any URLs given should use a scheme that provides
>> confidentiality (``https``, for example, rather than ``http`` or ``git``)
>>
>> Before we make that change it would be great if someone could check how
>> many packages we would make buggy. (I'm sure there's some good way to do
>> this with standard tools, but I don't know off-hand how to do it.)
> Yeah, that's something that crossed my mind too before reassigning.
> I've just done it now:
Ah, thank you, the awk magic was the piece that didn't come to mind.
> And that one instance seems to be "bogus" anyway as the Vcs-Svn URL
> does not exist anymore. So I'd say the above change looks perfectly
> fine to me, thanks! :)
> So, «Seconded».
In that case, should we increase the strength of this by changing the
first sentence? I'm not seeing much purpose served by developer
discretion here, and this clarifies matters for tool developers.
diff --git a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
index 81b3542..8124d64 100644
--- a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
+++ b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst
@@ -979,7 +979,10 @@ repository where the Debian source package is developed.
or ``hg clone`` command. If no branch is specified, the packaging
should be on the default branch.
- More than one different VCS may be specified for the same package.
+ A package control file must not have more than one ``Vcs-<type>``
+ field. If the package is maintained in multple version control
+ systems, the maintainer should specify the one that they would prefer
+ other people to use as the basis for proposing changes to the package.
For both fields, any URLs given should use a scheme that provides
confidentiality (``https``, for example, rather than ``http`` or ``git``)
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: