Re: git vs dfsg tarballs
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <email@example.com> wrote:
> I'm often seeing packagers directly putting dfsg'ed trees into their git
> repos, w/o any indication how the tree was actually created from the
> original releases.
> My preferred way (except for rare cases where upstream history is
> extremely huge - like mozilla stuff) would be just branching at the
> upstream's release tag and adding commits for removing the non-dfsg
> files ontop of that.
the main reason for having +dfsg versions is that non-distributable
stuff is removed. Distributing these files in a Debian hosted GIT
repository would not be workable, would it?
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'