On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 12:55:08AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > Based on all of the rumblings on this list about a release next spring, > > it's going to be another nine or ten months before we can even use this > > thing. And that's if we are to believe that Debian is still capible of > > releasing in a timely manner. I'll believe that when I see it. > > I'd hope that we will be able to upload dpkg-source v2 packages soon > after dpkg-source v2 goes into debian. There is no rule that says we > have to make source packages extractable (or buildable!) with older > versions of debian. According to Adam Heath, that will not happen. Katie has been modified to recognise and reject dpkg-source v2 packages until after sarge's release. Sorry, doogie hath spoken. Thou shalt not use new features of dpkg until after sarge. =( > Those who need to backport a dpkg-source v2 package can simply backport > dpkg-source v2 first, much as they would backport a newer version of > debhelper, patch, gcc, or anything else that might have a newer version > that is needed to unpack and/or build a package from stable. Of course > it would be a good idea to keep dpkg-source2's source in v1 format; > luckily the package is native.. I agree, but since when does my opinion matter? The current state of affiars was agreed upon largely without public input (in fact, according to my list archives, it was agreed upon over objections from others beside myself who thought it was unreasonable to hold back features from unstable for a new source package..) -- Joseph Carter <email@example.com> Not many fishes <Knghtbrd> Subject: [GR PROPOSAL] Should we vote on trivial matters?
Description: PGP signature