About using CDBS: Open discussion
We've had a small conversation about using CDBS in legacy packages in
the IRC channel that I thought would allow us to open a discussion
about it. Any thoughts on this?
Greetings,
Miry
[10:04:51] <Baby> wormux is packaged using cdbs?
[10:05:19] <pabs> eddyp did the update:
[10:05:22] <pabs> <eddyp> KiBi: goneri, Tolimar : please upload to
experimental http://users.alioth.debian.org/~eddyp-guest/upload/wormux_0.8.2-1/
(scp will probably finish by the time you read)
[10:09:35] <Baby> I know, but then again, is there a reason for that?
[10:10:08] <pabs> reason for using cdbs?
[10:10:14] <Baby> yup
[10:11:14] <Baby> I mean, if there is a reason to use cdbs and we're
starting using it now, we might as well do it officially
[10:11:31] <pabs> looks like the previous maintainer migrated to cdbs in 2006
[10:11:48] <Baby> http://wiki.debian.org/Games/ToolsDiscuss
[10:12:08] <persia> For adopted packages, I think it makes sense to
use whateer tools the previous maintainer used until someone has time
to convert it.
[10:12:21] <KiBi> anyway, cdbs is nowhere like the hell some pretends it is
[10:12:39] <Baby> KiBi: I'm not saying it is, I don't have a clue about it
[10:12:41] <persia> Well, it depends on what you're doing. Read the
sendmail debian/rules for a counterexample
[10:12:45] <KiBi> (as in: I see no reason to convert it from cdbs to
debhelper if no cdbs bug is hit)
[10:12:56] <Baby> but, as I said, if we start using cdbs we might
better do it openly and officially :)
[10:13:15] <KiBi> Well, IMHO there's no "if we start using cdbs".
[10:13:22] <Baby> well, I don't agree with us saying we're doing
things one way and doing it another
[10:13:25] <KiBi> We have some packages using it, point.
[10:13:36] <Baby> ok, then the wiki should reflect that
[10:13:54] <pabs> actually I lie, looks like it was team-maintained before 2006
[10:13:58] <persia> Baby, Should the wiki reflect that, or should we
have minor/wishlist bugs to convert them to debhelper?
[10:14:33] <Baby> I don't really know persia, we might pefectly talk
about it in the mailing list, but one of both
[10:15:15] <KiBi> w00t
[10:15:27] <KiBi> Switching from cdbs to dh would look *strange* to me.
[10:15:40] <Baby> I mean, I'm not closed to cdbs even though I don't
have a clue about it and it's not in my roadmap to learn it, but we
should better be as open as possible about how we do things
[10:15:46] <pabs> KiBi: what about cdbs -> dh 7 ?
[10:15:47] <KiBi> (or are we talking about using fancy dh7 features?)
[10:16:56] <Baby> is there any problem for anyone her if I cut this
part of the conversation and send it to the mailing list to open a
discussion about it?
[10:17:28] <pabs> fine by me
[10:17:46] <Baby> persia, KiBi?
[10:17:51] <persia> I'm good.
[10:18:57] <KiBi> Baby: as usual, what I say in channels is to be
considered public.
[10:19:07] <Baby> thanks :)
[10:19:17] <Baby> it's safer to ask... and more polite :)
Reply to: