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

Re: No native packages?

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 18:43:22 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> So what do you propose instead? It's not like native packages get
> NMUed because of great entertainment value of the NMU process, but
> because there's no better choice.

The same thing we usually do when confronted with a dead upstream

And in case the maintainer is active elsewhere in the project, has
not replied to RC bugs nor possible intentions to NMU, and it's
something that really needs fixing, then I think the current native
NMU procedure (the upstream+nmuN stuff) is bogus and needs to be fixed,
instead the package should be converted to a non-native one and a
traditional NMU version used (something like upstream-0.N), as used
to be the case before, so that the original tarball is preserved, and
the changes distinguished from the upstream releases to make it clear
what's what.

> (Random data point: I have 14 packages with versions indicating they
> are NMUed native packages installed on my system. Some of them have
> priority standard or higher.)

I've a similar number on my system, but most of these appear to be
from people that have not been active in the project for a while?


Reply to: