Re: dput: Call for feedback: What should change? What should stay the same?
Am 28. Dezember 2016 05:31:39 MEZ, schrieb Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>:
>Howdy all,
>
>I recently donned the mantle of maintaining ‘dput’ and am carefully
>making improvements. I am conscious of the special need for backward
>compatibility so I am taking care to understand how the Debian
>developer
>community uses it today.
>
>So I'm now familiar enough, but still fresh enough, that feedback from
>people with different experiences is particularly valuable.
>
>
>What does ‘dput’ do that you think really should not be changed?
>
>What does ‘dput’ do that you wish it would stop doing?
>
>What do other tools do better than ‘dput’? Do you think that ‘dput’
>should change to do those tasks the same way?
>
>
>The same questions can be asked of the ‘dcut’ program from the same
>package.
>
>The ‘dput-ng’ package is one alternative that is sometimes suggested
>when people hit the limits in ‘dput’. I am not a user of ‘dput-ng’ or
>other alternatives, so am also seeking feedback from people who have
>informed positions on choosing one over the other.
>
>Both newcomers and old hands are welcome to give responses on these
>questions.
I'd like to see #791828 fixed and make it possible to habe dput and dput-ng installed the same time.
--
Tobias Frost
GPG fingerprint: 13C9 04F0 CE08 5E7C 3630 7985 DECF 849A A635 7FB7
Reply to: