Re: Source packages
Michael Alan Dorman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Bill Mitchell pointed out that if we use totally 100% un-modified
> extra-virgin upstream sources, debian-driven updates to debian source
> packages become much smaller, since we're just changing the delta. [...]
You're giving me credit for thinking further into the implications of
this than I did.
However, now that you montion it, this is an argument against Bruce's
proposed new source package format. It begins to look like the DELTA
file in Bruce's proposal (which I've suggested should be a debianizing
script rather than raw patch input to be manually applied) should be
a separate file..
The source package, in a format looking like Bruce's but without
the DELTA file, would produce upstream (but possibly Linuxized?)
sources for a particular upstream version of the package. Running
the debianizing script for a particular debian version would then
produce that version's debianizied sources.
If the user kept the source package around, he'd just need to
retrieve the DELTA file for the next version. re-extract
sources, and run the new DELTA script. Also, debian package
maintainers would only need to upload the updated DELTA script
for package upgrades once the source package had been uploaded once.
> I guess the question is whether debian is a democracy, and if not, who's
We operated successfully for some time as a benevelolent dictatorship.
Ian M. has been dictator, with a rarely-used power to rule by decree.
On a question like this, there's usually been some period of discussion,
followed either near-consensus and dissenters throwing it the towel.
cases where consensus didn't come out of discussion have sometimes
been decided by decree.
Lately, we seem to have a troika (Ian M., Bruce P., Ian J.), with
firm and sometimes conflicting pronouncements by individual troika