Re: proposed MBF: packages still using source format 1.0

[Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>]

Ian Jackson wrote:
>
>1. Why is 1.0-without-diff not always worse than 3.0 (native) ?
>
>1.0 native is sometimes better than 3.0 (native) because dpkg-source
>refuses to build a 3.0 native package with a Debian revision in its
>version number.
>
>This prohibition exists solely because of a doctrinal objection to
>native-format packages with Debian revisions.  There is no technical
>reason why this restriction could not be lifted.  I sometimes upload
>this way and I have never had anyone report problems[1] with it.
>
>IMO there is nothing wrong with native format packages with Debian
>revisions.  They work just fine.  For a small paockage, this is often
>a good choice, because it avoids dealing with patches at all.

Why on earth *would* you mess around using Debian revisions on a
native-format package, though? IMHO it's pointless and is just going
to confuse people. Unless you can explain a good reason to need this,
I'd argue strongly that the 3.0 native support is DTRT for the
principle of least surprise if nothing else!

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"We're the technical experts.  We were hired so that management could
 ignore our recommendations and tell us how to do our jobs."  -- Mike Andrews