Re: Do you use the DBS? Document it!
On Thu, 2002-06-06 at 06:51, Adam Heath wrote:
> A previous version suggested using README.patches, to document each patch.
> This became hard to keep uptodate, as it separated the description from the
> patch it described.
My preference is to include the description in the patch file, as patch
will automatically skip any junk before and after the patch.
The problem with standardization is why I now maintain the dbs package,
however, I suspect not many programs use it (ones that do use it include
krb4, heimdal, and hello-dbs; this list may be incomplete).
However, I am still not happy with this solution, ideally dpkg-source
should support dbs itself, without needing to include the upstream
source archive within a .orig.tar.gz file (this makes it awkward to
convert a dbs source to non-dbs source and vice versa, unless you can
change the upstream version number).
If you can think of (and write) better documentation to include in the
dbs package, please let me know.
 It also needs to be enhanced to support *.tar.bzip2, and *.zip.
Brian May <email@example.com>
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com