Re: proposed MBF: packages still using source format 1.0
Richard Laager <rlaager@debian.org> writes:
> Could we only have "3.0 (quilt)" then, no "3.0 (native)"? Or, put
> differently, if you had a "native" package that is using a Debian
> revision and we allow that, what difference is left between "3.0
> (native)" and "3.0 (quilt)"?
3.0 (quilt) always has two tarballs, one for the upstream source and one
for the Debian packaging. 3.0 (native) has a single source tarball, which
I think is the desired goal here.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: