hi all, On Wednesday 30 January 2008 06:21:52 pm Joey Hess wrote: > Clint Adams wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 05:37:03PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > This work flow simply doesn't work with our current source package > > > format and a patch management system. Requiring this to work *with the > > > current source package format* essentially means outlawing using patch > > > management systems to manage Debian packages. That's why this proposal > > > is controversial. > > > > I agree with Lars that we should move toward requiring it to work. > > As do I (perhaps obviously). is there any reason why this issue couldn't be solved by amending policy (or just simply patching dpkg-source) to require that "debian/rules patch" (or some less commonly used name if we're worried about existing implementations of this rule) is called as part of the unpacking process or a source package? just a thought... sean
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.