Re: Documentation on handling of orig.tar.gz files for Developer's Reference or for Debian Policy
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 01:47:02PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> How about this rule of thumb: If you get stuff from the
> primary NON DEBIAN distribution site, that is what you call
> upstream. What someone unconnected to debian, not using debian
> archives, downloads is what we also offer as upstream orig.tar.gz
I think it's more important that our users *know what they're getting*
than that we try to enforce some sort of arbitrary distinction between
"Debian" and "upstream". Clarity is why I chose "107.0pre108" as a
version number. I don't see how it's that much different from our
various cvs-snapshot packages, except that in my case, upstream wasn't
using any sort of version control at the time I made the package -
they just had a loose collection of patches and replacement files
available on their website.
> Pristine upstream means pristine upstream. Either get your
> notes added to upstream website, or put them in the diffs.
We don't require "pristine upstream". For example, we remove non-DFSG
compliant portions. Many licenses require that changes be
documented. So if we modify the upstream source to remove the
non-DFSG portions, and _don't document that_ (because of a new policy
rule that forbids any debian-authored portions of _orig tarballs),
then we may be violating licenses.
> Do not prevaricate to our suers by pretending that some material is
> the same as they can get upstream, when it is not.
I don't think I am - I think it's quite clear that 107.0pre108 is
quite different from 107.
> > Anyway, I was upstream project leader for most of the
> > last year, up until about a week ago, when I stepped down in favor
> > of someone more enthusiastic. But I'm still an upstream developer.
> That is quite irrelevant.
Actually, I agree. I think the fact that I can solve "the problem" by
sticking the tarball I made on the upstream website at any moment I
choose is, or should be, irrelevant. I think the tarball I created
should be acceptable in any case. I think it's quite clear what I
created, and I don't think there's any intent to confuse our users,
and I think that should be sufficient.
Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra- osis is too long
email@example.com | microscopicsilico- to fit into a single
or firstname.lastname@example.org | volcaniconi- standalone haiku