Re: RFC: DEP-14: Recommended layout for Git packaging repositories
> 2014-11-12 10:28 GMT+01:00 Raphael Hertzog <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>> On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, Mathieu Parent wrote:
> OK. Makes sense. The unstripped upstream can then live in an
> non-namespaced branch if needed (this is not my usual workflow but should be
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, Mathieu Parent wrote:
>> Maybe a short note would be good then? (but I don't know how to write it).
> I suggest this:
> --- a/web/deps/dep14.mdwn
> +++ b/web/deps/dep14.mdwn
> @@ -230,6 +230,17 @@ non-patchable data), you can do so but you should then
> this in `debian/README.source` along with some explanations of the tool to
use to build the package.
> +About repacked upstream sources
> +When the upstream sources needs to be repacked (for example to drop some
+non-DFSG compliant files), then the branches and tags under the
+`upstream/` prefix should actually contain the repacked sources. +
> +How the problematic files are pruned does not matter. What matters is that
+what is stored in the `upstream/*` namespace are the sources that package
+maintainers are effectively using.
> Managing debian/changelog
> Does this meet your expectation?
Should we add a word or two (some warning/reminder) how to handle removing
non-free content, especially if (Debian thinks) that the removed files are not
To avoid that we actucally distribute them in some branch without recognizing.