Re: No native packages?
Tollef Fog Heen <email@example.com> writes:
> ]] Gergely Nagy
>> No, not really. I don't really care what tools one uses, as long as the
>> result is reasonably easy *and* reliable to work with. Since VCS can be
>> stale, and quite often does not include neither NMUs, nor backports,
>> that fails the reliable requirement.
> It sounds like you are arguing that we should just ship the the
> repository in the source package, then. No chance of it ever getting
> out of date, trivial to find the merge points and missing patches
> between two packages and fits much better with a VCS-driven workflow.
Yes, many of us would like that, which is why it's been repeatedly
discussed at Debconfs, but no one has come up with a good solution to the
fact that this requires reviewing the entire VCS archive for DFSG-freeness
and rewriting history if any non-free code is ever introduced in it. (Or,
well, changing the requirements we have around source package freeness,
but that seems less likely.)
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>