Re: tarball in tarball: opinions
On Sat, 2008-07-05 at 12:21 -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> So, is using tarball in tarball considered "bad" these days?
I see no reason to consider this "bad".
> Is it
> viewed as an approach that once had its time but is now discouraged,
I don't use it, but don't let that discourage you. :)
> is it just a matter of personal preference
Yes I think that it's a matter of personal preference / packaging style.
> and creating a
> README.source that tells the user what to do file makes it all okay?
It is a good idea to document tricky things in such a README file.
> I want my packages to be in the best possible shape, so I'm trying to
> decide whether I should go to the trouble of changing my personal
> packaging habits to work around the two issues above.
Trying something new is sometimes fun. :)
> Some of these
> will be easier to handle after we can switch to 3.0 (quilt), but as
> far as I know, there is no way to replace your .orig.tar.gz without
> changing the package version, and I don't want to introduce epochs for
No need to introduce epochs. You can update package foo-1.2.3-4 to
foo-1.2.3+debian-1 or something similar.
> Advice welcome.
My advice is that you use the packaging style conforming to
debian-policy that you feel most comfortable with.