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

Re: Bug#457353: gdome2-xslt: should not be a Debian-native package

Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:17:16PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
>> Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Neil Williams wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>> I thought this consensus was already a fact and that some maintainers
>>> just disagree and nobody forced them to change yet...
>>> The reasons why it shouldn't be a native package IMHO:
>>> * it's not specific to Debian
>>> * it wastes bandwidth as every upload contains all the sources
>>> * it's confusing for newcomers
>>> * it's error prone for NMUs and security updates
>> I'd just add:
>> * it isn't in the spirit of free software to make it hard for others to
>> use the code - making a package Debian-native when it could work on any
>> GNU/Linux or POSIX platform makes it unnecessarily hard for a Fedora or
>> Gentoo user etc. to package the code and maintain it in their own
>> distro.
> Sorry, but that's totally wrong. Nobody every told anyone to use the
> debian/ directory for anything.
>> How are they to know whether the latest native version is Debian
>> specific or contains useful "upstream" improvements?
> By reading debian/changelog -- that's what it's for!
>> There is plenty of free hosting that could be used for this code - SF is
>> probably the most common, berlios another.
> gdome2-xslt isn't the only package that's debian-native while not being
> debian-specific. Offlineimap comes to mind; I did also consider making
> nbd a native package once, since releasing nbd twice (once upstream and
> once in Debian, five seconds later) is silly. I didn't do so, because
> it's already on SF where people will expect it anyway, so that wouldn't
> reduce the work; but if I could get away with no longer releasing on SF,
> I would most likely turn it into a native package.
> There's no reason why we should force maintainers to do more work to
> upload their software twice, just because some people think doing a
> native package for non-debian-specific code is ugly. It isn't.

Non-argument IMHO as there is nothing stopping you to release the
package as non-native package so people outside debian can use the
orig.tar.gz as upstream source...



Reply to: