Re: RFC: debhelper v2
Darren O. Benham wrote:
> The only thing I'd change is the order of which these happen. Default
> should be the new behavior... as long as we can do this w/o shutting down
> the autobuilders. If the old behavior is default, it'll be that much
> harder to phase it out.
Unfortunatly that's really not an option. I can't break the build process of
50% of the distribution.
It may take a year or two to phase out v1, but I'm confident I can grep the
archive to tell when it's almost phased out, and I can handle the wait.
see shy jo