Re: Recent changes in dpkg
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:26:02AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> * Philipp Kern <trash@philkern.de> [2010-05-27 08:11:36 CEST]:
> | As far as I understood it, it's not that much about unpacking, because
> | the format is pretty clear then, but about packing (or in this case
> | repacking) the source package. There you should be explicit in what
> | you mean because future versions of dpkg might abort if the source version
> | is not explicitly specified in the package.
>
> Why is that needed? It always was explicit that 1.0 is meant, what's
> the need for the change?
>
> | Now I think the maintainers did outline why they want that in the past. :P
>
> Why they want it unfortunately is a wrong reasoning - the actual
> pending and still unanswered question is "why it is needed". They
> want people to switch to 3.0. By forcing to put something into
> debian/source/format people start putting 1.0 in there for no gain. I
> still fail to have received any real answer why debian/source/format
> "1.0" containing is better than no debian/source directory at all.
There is one possible benefit: impossibility to create a native package
when the .orig.tar.gz is missing, which happens much too often.
Mike
Reply to: