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

Re: DEP-5: removed files

Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:

> while checking the section of the Developers reference
> (“Repackaged upstream source”) in the context on another thread on this
> list
> ([🔎] d921045c2e3ae5ecfba088e9d82eb2c6@drazzib.com">http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/[🔎] d921045c2e3ae5ecfba088e9d82eb2c6@drazzib.com),
> I found the following :

>   A repackaged .orig.tar.gz
>      1. should be documented in the resulting source package. Detailed
>      information on how the repackaged source was obtained, and on how
>      this can be reproduced should be provided in debian/copyright. It
>      is also a good idea to provide a get-orig-source target in your
>      debian/rules file that repeats the process, as described in the
>      Policy Manual, Main building script: debian/rules.

> I have no strong opinion on the subject, but I think that either the
> Developers Reference should be modified to reflect current consensus and
> practice, or in contrary the section of the Dev. Ref. argues for
> the incorporation of the removing information in the DEP-5
> machine-readable format.

I personally still believe this information belongs in debian/copyright,
not in README.source.  README.source might be appropriate if there are
detailed instructions required for how someone else would create a new
upstream source tarball, but debian/copyright is the appropriate location
to describe the provenance of the upstream tarball, which in my opinion
should include a human-readable description of transformations applied to

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: