[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#904302: Why outlawing vendor-specific patch series would be a bad idea



Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org> writes:

...
>> "The source" is what you get after steps 1 and 2.
>
> Why is "The source" what you get after dpkg applied patches,
> but before debian/rules applied patches?

I agree with Sean's point about it being a matter of definition relating
to when we invoke debian/rules, but for an alternative justification one
might look at this:

For the Debian Maintainer, what is the preferred form of modification?

It could be the source before the patches are applied (especially if
they're working on a patch to be sent upstream), but really, chances are
that it's actually the state of the source after the Debian patches are
applied.

It is almost certainly _not_ the state that source might get transformed
into at some point during the build process.

It is also almost certainly not the alternative version of the source
that results from applying a patch series that only gets applied if they
unpack the source on a different vendor's OS.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands  [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]  HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-|  http://www.hands.com/    http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34,   21075 Hamburg,    GERMANY

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: