Re: RFC declarative built-using field generation
Matthias Klose <email@example.com> writes:
> But it is ok to insist on using the exact binary version for
> build-depending on source packages when it's not needed? This only seems
> to be driven by the current dak implementation.
That does matter if the included source is GPL, and I suspect part of the
problem is that DAK doesn't have any way of knowing *why* this is required
and not making the dependency tight would be a *very* common error.
I think that in any case where we want Built-Using, we probably also want
the exact same version of the source. (But I think the current Policy
statement about when we want Built-Using is too broad.)
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>