On May 22, Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote: > I think at this point we can recommend dh, and require debhelper (i.e., > the individual dh_* tools could be required to be part of the build > system, but how they are called can be left to a maintainer's > discretion, with the assumption that "you use dh or perhaps cdbs, except > if you're trying to develop something better, but then you still use > debhelper behind the scenes to do the low-level work" This looks reasonable to me too. (Now I am almost sold on dh, BTW.) -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature