On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 04:51:18PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi Joerg, On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 04:17:51PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:OTOH we need to stay open for enhancing things. So while I am a fan of "dh for everyone, throw away all the hand crafted stuff", it should not make it impossible to come up with new stuff in the future.Fine for NEW stuff. I could also imagine exceptions for *really* complex stuff. I fail to see any reason why to refuse a patch turning rules to dh for those simple packages just out of personal preference. My point is to stop random personal preferences overriding team maintainable packages that do not have any specific requirements.
Here's something that occurred to me. Imagine you had a team that, within the team, had standardised on (say) SVN and cdbs. Whenever that team picked up a new package, they then used SVN and cdbs for it: because that was then consistent for the packages within the team. Even if the rest of Debian had moved in other ways (and even if their upstreams had moved in other ways wrt VCS) So the consistency argument is more nuanced if one strives for consistency within a sub-community of Debian. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.