Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > tags 457353 + wontfix > thanks > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 07:20:57PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote: >> You're missing a .diff.gz, which means that this is a native package. This >> package is in no way specific to Debian, which means that this shouldn't be >> a Debian-native package. > > Sorry, but I disagree with this interpretation. For me a Debian native > package is a package which contains the official debian packaging stuff > in the upstream tarball. Since I'm also upstream for gdome2-xslt and the > software has been used historically always as a Debian package, to me > that is a native Debian package. To me, just because a package is only currently used in Debian does not mean it should be Debian native. Native, to me at least, means "This package is only likely to *work* on Debian because it needs basic parts of Debian infrastructure that only Debian (or Debian derivatives) will be able to provide)." Things like apt and dpkg, basically. I have a mixture of upstream projects, some of which have only ever been released in Debian but not all of those are native to Debian. The ones that are include deb-gview (reads .deb packages), apt-cross, dpkg-cross and emdebian-tools which are definitely Debian native as they do fancy things with the apt cache and dpkg build process. Others like pilot-qof, qof and gpe-expenses are most definitely not native - even though only Debian/Ubuntu has included pilot-qof in a release AFAICT. i.e. native should be a last resort - used only when it is all but impossible for the package to be used outside Debian or some distro fundamentally based on Debian like Ubuntu. > Of course if the global consensus will change so that native packages > are only those Debian-specific I would be more than happy to change > gdome2-xslt, but at the moment I feel there is no such a consensus. > > Cc-ing -devel for the sake of this discussion. Gnome is certainly not Debian-specific and there doesn't appear to be anything in GDome that would appear to make it impossible to use on Fedora or Gentoo etc. If this was my package, I'd be tempted to put the source on SF or somewhere, exclude the debian/ contents from the make dist target but keep them in whichever RCS you want to use and package it from there. Then if anyone from Fedora or wherever wants to use it, they can. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature