Re: New source package formats now available
Gerfried Fuchs <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Some few comments.
> * Raphael Hertzog <email@example.com> [2009-11-21 16:54:36 CET]:
>> * even if you don't have any upstream patch right now, next time that
>> someone must NMU your package, they can cleanly add a patch (with a
>> proper DEP-3 header) without having to modify the build system
> This is nothing new for the 3.0 (quilt) format, this is a reason for
> any patch system format, so this feels a bit like false-advertising,
> sorry. Don't get me wrong, I use quilt where I have to touch upstream
> sources myself and totally like it, I just don't see the need to use
> this as advertising for the 3.0 format because that doesn't buy you much
> more in that respect.
The BIG difference is that you (as NMUer) can just
apt-get source foo
and a new patch will be created automatically. You work on the source
as if there is no patch system involved and it will do the right
thing. If you do happen to know about quilt and the package already
has patches you can take advantage of quilt features. You can edit
patches or annotate files to find the guilty patch and so on. But if
you don't know or don't like quilt you can also totaly ignore it.
So what you get is a free (as in nothing needs to be in debian/rules
or Build-Depends) patch system that is also free to anyone using the
source. There is no required learning curve.
>> * in the long run it's best to standardize on a single patch system (new
>> contributors need to learn a single system, more people can help you,
>> etc.) and quilt appears to be that patch system.
> That part feels also a bit strange - I don't think it should be the
> decision of the dpkg team to force people to use a specific patch
> system. Again, I use quilt myself. Though, Debian (and free software in
> general) always was about choice. And yes, I know, there's 3.0 (native),
> but that wasn't mentioned.
And the choice is still there. As you say yourself there is 3.0
(native) even if it wasn't advertized. Also things like topgit can be
used and the resulting source package can still use 3.0 (quilt)
format. That will allow for the maintainer to use his/her favourite
environment while everybody else still has to option to use the
resulting source package with or even without quilt. Again, no
learning curve to modify the source.
Maybe think of 3.0 (quilt) more as an interchange format of debian
>> When you switch to "3.0 (quilt)", there are other changes that you might
>> want to do:
addressed in other mails