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

Re: Upstream maintainer adding debian/rules

On Fri, Nov 06, 1998 at 06:23:16PM +0200, Kalle Niemitalo wrote:
> I have added debian/rules and debian/control in the source tree and
> succeeded to build and install a binary package.

Please, PLEASE, make the resulting .deb Policy conformant!  Even
though you are not bound by the Policy since you are not uploading the
.deb to the main archive, following the Policy will make your package
be of as high standard as the rest.  The anarchy of the unofficial
packages is probably RedHat's biggest mistake; I don't want it
replicated in Debian (even by those who are not Debian developers).

Please, Lintian your package, and heed the warnings and errors.

> I don't want to become an official Debian developer, at least not
> yet.  I'm too lazy for that

Then you shouldn't make a package.  Once you make a Policy-conforming
package (which you should do anyway), there is not much additional
work in being a Debian developer (I gather; I am still in the process
of getting my developerness approved).  And you get the benefits of
the BTS `kaupan päälle'.

> and DUMB may still be too buggy to be included in a distribution.

By all means, become a Debian developer, upload DUMB and file an
Important bug for DUMB in the BTS detailing the release-critical
problems you have.  That way DUMB will not find itself in any frozen
or stable release before you have closed the bug.

> Is there some reason why I should move the Debian files to a separate
> patch?

Yes.  You might want to keep your job as a upstream developer and the
Debian packager separated.  A story:

When I fiddle with the core functionality of plari, I mess up my
upstream tarball.  When I'm finished upstream, I upload the tarball to
CTAN.  Then I suddenly become the Debian developer and package it.
And when I find that my packaging was suboptimal, I just dpkg-source
-x the .dsc, edit debian/ and rebuild.  No need to reupload the core
source to anywhere (say, CTAN), since it has not changed.

However, it seems that most Debian developers who are also upstream
developers, prefer to have a single tarball for it all.

> Is it necessary (or even useful) to have the .dsc files on FTP sites?

Of course! .dsc is the Debian source (although it requires the
tarballs and possible diffs to perform as Debian source:-)

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho A7 <gaia@iki.fi> ** <URL:http://www.iki.fi/gaia/> **

                       The FAQ is your friend.
                            Trust the FAQ.

Reply to: