Vincent Renardias wrote: > Your proposal looks good, but there's already a great source handling > system in rpm. I'm *NOT* suggesting to switch to rpm, but I really like > rpm's way to handle _source_ packages. We can probably take advantage of > a system that is known to already work (maybe not reusing 100% of it, but > at least taking the key ideas). I haven't really looked at RPM, so I'm not sure of what they are doing, other than having .SRPM files. I don't think they have separate upstream source packages though. > Within our current organisation, I can only see one flaw in it: we'll > need to be able to split the upstream source from the diff for uploading, > since I don't think many of us are willing to reupload all the sources at > each upload. Actually, they are split in the proposal: there are .upsdeb's for upstream sources and .sdeb's to store the Debian-specific modifications and package building scripts. Come to think of it, it wouldn't even be necessary to have the same maintainer for the .upsdeb as the .sdeb as the .deb. ie. One person could see something they liked on c.o.l.a., grab it off of sunsite, and make a .upsdeb of it (and install it for themselves in /usr/local). Then someone else might take the .upsdeb, and run debmake or something similar on it to build an .sdeb -- then they could customize it to their delight, and upload the .deb and the .sdeb to master. Then someone else might take that .sdeb, and generate a .deb for a different architecture. Cheers, - Jim
Attachment:
pgpQCDGfcUNuB.pgp
Description: PGP signature