Re: let missing-debian-source-format lintian tag be a warning!
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:53:10AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:26:28PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> >> It *is* a shame that the patch-handling aspect of 3.0 (Quilt) is
> >> offputting enough to folks that some are avoiding 3.0 altogether and
> >> not benefitting from the other improvements. However the
> >> single-debian-patch workaround is a pretty good compromise, IMHO, and
> >> perhaps just needs wider awareness.
>
> > I wonder, what if we changed the meaning of no debian/source/format to
> > 3.0 (quilt) + single-debian-patch? Would anything break?
>
> Yes: packages that are already using quilt with debian/patches and the 1.0
> source format (perhaps because they don't want patches applied
> automatically on unpack but instead want control of that in debian/rules
> for one reason or another) would not play well with that change, since
> both the existing quilt system and the 3.0 (quilt) source format want to
> control and interpret debian/patches.
I checked: it looks like 1050 (!) source packages use the 1.0 format _and_
have a debian/patches directory. Suffering both 1.0 and quilt... the worst
of both worlds. Scary!
--
Gnome 3, Windows 8, Slashdot Beta, now Firefox Ribbon^WAustralis. WTF is going
on with replacing usable interfaces with tabletized ones?
Reply to: