At 2024-03-31T22:32:49+0000, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Upstreams would probably prefer that we used git repositories > *directly* as source artifacts, but that comes with a whole other can > of worms... Speaking from my upstream groff perspective, I wouldn't _prefer_ that. The distribution archives get build-testing on a much wider variety of systems, thanks to people on the groff@ and platform-testers@gnu mailing lists that help out when a release candidate is announced. They have access to platforms more exotic that I and a few other bleeding-edge HEAD mavens do. This practice tangibly improved the quality of the groff 1.23.0 release, especially on surviving proprietary Unix systems. Building from the repo, or using the bootstrap script--which Colin Watson just today ensured will be in future distribution archives--is fine.[1] I'm glad some people build the project that way. But I think that procedure serves an audience that is distinguishable in some ways. Regards, Branden [1] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/commit/?id=822fef56e9ab7cbe69337b045f6f20e32e25f566
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature