On 27/11/24 04:30, Otto Kekรคlรคinen wrote:
Secondly, it is perfectly valid for evey single package to have a debian/gbp.conf and I would in fact prefer that. For every upstream we need to have metadata on: - do they have tarball releases (pristine-tar true/false) - do they have git tags and what is the format (upstream-vcs-tag) - are those git tags expected to be signed or not (upstream-signatures on/off)
It's great that these important pieces of information can be stored in d/gbp.conf (and I will keep doing it), but this information should really be stored somewhere in d/upstream/metadata.
On the same topic, many people have asked in the past for a machine-readable and tooling-independent way to specify:
a) information about the way upstream does releases and, b) the packaging workflow used by that package manager.For some, this documentation would be a step-stop towards a standardized workflow. For others, it would act as a replacement for a standardized workflow.
We should really start a discussion on a "formalized README.source.md". Regards, -- Gioele Barabucci