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

Re: About using CDBS: Open discussion

Miriam Ruiz schrieb:
> 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

Hi all

  Just to mix things that are only slightly related again, I think this
approximately the same thing as the packages using dpatch instead of
quilt (there are some of them) -- although dpatch -> quilt can be done
quite easily in contrast to cdbs -> debhelper.

To the subject: I personally agree with persia

> [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.

  If packages are working correctly with these tools which are (afaik)
not considered obsolete in general there are a lot of things that -- in
my eyes -- have priority over switching some tool.

  The best solution would IMO be to state in the wiki that these tools
we -- or better you, I was not an team member back then -- decided upon
shall be used for new packages and everything we inherited may either
keep it's current system as long as it works or switch to our prefered



/"\  ASCII Ribbon : GPG-Key ID: 0x0372275D
\ /    Campaign   :
 X   against HTML :
/ \   in eMails   :

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: