Re: Standard to indicate repacking in version numbers?
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 10:13:51AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> writes:
>
> > I agree with that we should have a common pattern. But I would vote for
> > a neutral extension not trying to describe the reasons for repackaging.
> > Some kind of <name>_<version>.repack.tar.gz comes to mind. This makes
> > clear that a changed upstream tarball is used. Those tarballs should
> > feature a mandatory debian/README.repack which states clearly the
> > reasons for the repackaging and debian/rules should have a mandatory
> > get-orig-source target.
>
> We went back and forth on this several times on debian-mentors and I think
> everyone finally agreed that debian/copyright is the correct place to
> explain any repackaging of the upstream source. Since debian/copyright is
> the standard place to explain where the upstream source came from, it's
> the logical place for that information to go. Please let's not add a new
> documentation file that isn't automatically collected by the PTS,
> packages.d.o, etc.
Personnally I put it in debian/README.sources with instruction on how
to generate the tarball from the upstream one.
debian/README.sources is mentionned in another policy proposal.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: