Bug#1007717: Native source package format with non-native version
Hi Ian,
On 15/03/22 at 16:29 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Part I - belss continued use of 1.0 native format, for now at least:
>
> 1. Declare explicitly that there is nothing wrong with a package with
> a native format, but a non-native version number.
>
> 2. Request that the dpkg maintainer relax the restriction which
> prevents the use of 3.0 native with Debian revision.
>
> 3. Consequently, declare that the recent MBF on this topic ought not
> to have been filed against packages where simply changing the
> source format does not currently work. That would include at
> least 1.0 native packages with Debian revisions.
>
> Part II - bless continued use of 1.0-with-diff, for now at least:
>
> 4. Declare that sometimes the use of 1.0-with-diff can be the best
> tradeoff between different considerations. In particular,
> because 1.0 is the only format which botH:
> (a) Optimises bandwidth and storage by reusing the upstream
> data when it hasn't changed.
> (b) Avoids polluting the working tree (package source code)
> with [patches], which cause trouble especially with
> git-based workflows.
>
> 5. Consequently, declare that the recent MBF on this topic ought not
> to have been filed against 1.0 with diff packages, at least
> without some further filter.
I did the MBF mentioned in (5) (about suggesting the move from the 1.0
format to one of the 3.0 formats), and agreed to pause those efforts in
<YjD/8hqJ/zqEX5W1@xanadu.blop.info>.
However, it might be worth clarifying if the MBF in (3) is mine, or
Guillem's one (with usertag dpkg-mismatch-source-vs-version-format and
user debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org) about "Mismatched source format vs
source version" (an example bug is #1007088). I think it's mine, but I'm
not sure. It might also be both.
Lucas
Reply to: