Re: Enabling uupdate to simply remove files from upstream source (Was: Minified javascript files)
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:44:44AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-08-18 at 10:19pm, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > 1. The new field Files-Excluded in debian/copyright contains
> > a space separated list of regular expressions.
> > The deletion process will loop over every expression
> >
> > rm -rf ${MAIN_SOURCE_DIR}/<expression>
>
> Copyright file format emplicitly emphasizes that the globbing is not
> shell style but find style.
>
> I believe it is better to loop over either of these expressions:
>
> find ${MAIN_SOURCE_DIR}/* -path <expression> -delete
>
> find ${MAIN_SOURCE_DIR}/* type f -name <expression> -delete
>
> The latter is when item does not contain "/".
ACK.
> > 4. In case something was removed the version string will be appended by
> > '+dfsg' to express the fact that the content of the original source
> > was changed.
>
> Suffix should be configurable.
>
> I use ~dfsg by default, ~dfsg1 and bumping numbers for multiple
> repackagings, and only +dfsg when the repackaging happens after a
> non-repackaged version was released into Debian.
>
> Reason for this is that there is a slight chance upstream may re-release
> same upstream version repackaged to fix a purely tarball-related issuem
> and I would then have room for using that proper version instead of
> using epoch or add a bogus .0 to the version.
This was also my initial idea when firt proposing ~dfsg. On the other
hand: I would *really* want to have upstream adding a new version number
to the cleaned up release. It is just (uhmm, find your own word here)
if people release the same named file with different content. So I do
not see great harm if we would settle with +dfsg. Gregor, could you give
better reasons than Jonas for +dfsg? I'm personally a friend of adding
one feature (the removal of files) first. Later we could add additional
features like configuring suffixes and compression methods.
> > For the implementation of this it waqs suggested to
> >
> > use Debian::Copyright;
>
> That initial test by Gregor makes me worry if Debian::Copyright parser
> might be too strict: Writing should be strict but parsing relaxed -
> Copyright file format with undefined fields added should *not* be
> treated as broken. Perhaps there are other surprises waiting to happen
> :-/
Could anybody say something about this?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: