[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: proposed MBF: packages still using source format 1.0



On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 10:49:17AM +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> >> It's probably unfashionable, but I think debian/patches is not a great
> >> way to manage changes, particularly if you're using a VCS for
> >> maintaining your packages. As others have pointed out in this thread,
> >> doing this means you end up essentially trying to version-control your
> >> patches twice - once in the source package, and once in the VCS.
> > That's just a consequence of using two different storage formats for your
> > packages: a Debian source package and a VCS. As long as both of them are widely
> > used and incompatible, problems will exist in some form when using both.
> > By e.g. merging all patches in the Debian source package into one big diff
> > you are just breaking one of these two storage formats for that package,
> > essentially mandating the usage of the other one (the VCS) for most of the
> > developer operations with it.
> 
> I'm not sure that's entirely true; 
Which of my statements?

> but even if it were, is that an entirely unreasonable position for a
> package maintainer (or team thereof) to take?
Probably not? Just yet another case where you need to learn a specific
workflow to modify or study a certain package, cannot use established
documentation for that, and are required to use specific non-default tools
for that.

-- 
WBR, wRAR

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: