Ansgar Burchardt <ansgar@43-1.org> writes: > On Thu, 2019-06-20 at 10:52 +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: >> This reminds me of something that popped up in a dinner discussion a few >> days ago: mandate documenting workflow in debian/README.source no matter >> what, and allow to symlink that file to a repository in >> /usr/share/doc/somewhere/ as we do for common licenses. > > My workflow also includes getting changes merged upstream, so any such > documentation would need to include the upstream workflow. Information > how to contribute also includes code style (spaces vs tabs), naming > conventions and so on. > > I'm not willing to write such things down for Debian for the rare case > someone might read it; there are enough other things that need to be > done. I'm glad for you that all those details are currently retained by your brain, but I suspect that if you're fortunate enough to live long enough there will come a time when such things manage to evaporate from memory. That being the case, you might want to consider writing such documentation while it's trivially easy for you to do so from memory, so as to save the frustration of your future self forgetting them. As a side effect, you'll also be saving anyone else from the effort of finding all that out about the upstreams etc. in case your interests change, and someone else has to take over your packages. You also seem to be making the perfect the enemy of the good here. I'd imagine that a partial description of your workflow would be better than none, and if anyone ever asks about the extra bits you could answer them by adding missing details to the package and thus get closer to full documentation without significant additional effort. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature