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

Re: native packages

Scripsit Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org>

> What if an upstream author who is a Debian developer includes a fully
> working debian/ directory along with, say, an rpm .spec file, in the
> main sources so that extracting the sources and running

> Clearly someone who did an NMU would have to generate a .diff.gz,
> probably with a -0.1 Debian version,

If the package needs to switch back and forth between "native" and
"non-native", it's a sign that one of the classifications is wrong

How about this: A package is only *native* is the Debian archive and
mirror network is THE canonical point of distribution for released
versions. NMUs for native packages should be packaged as .tar.gz (no
diff), and the NMU then becomes THE canonically last released version
of the software.

If the author wants to maintain his own "primary" or "original"
distribution site for released versions, then the package is *not
native*, even though the author may be identical to the Debian

There's nothing wrong in principle with upstream releasing a working
debian/ directory in his sources. It just doesn't mean that the
package becomes native. The source package should still be formatted
as .orig.tar.gz plus .diff.gz. If the Debian maintainer decides that
the contents of upstream's debian/ directory are good and do not need
changing, he's free to upload an empty .diff.gz. Then NMUs can be done
without changing the package's status, and there will be no confusion
if the author tires of the package, and different people inherit the
upstream and Debian maintainerships.

Henning Makholm               "Monarki, er ikke noget materielt ... Borger!"

Reply to: