Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > I guess if we use Joey's idea at all we will not be able to avoid > shipping such a module for each distributed VCS, and I didn't get > the impression that Joey thought otherwise. I do think otherwise. If the distributed (or other) VCS does not meet our criteria for security and backwards compatability, then we should not ship it. And yes, it'll be up to the dpkg maintainers to enforce those criteria if you crack open the floodgates.. > Is the last one really such a big problem in Debian? I know that many upstream > VCS don't contain autogenerated files but most .orig.tar.gz's already > contain them today, so I would have guessed people either only have > their debian/ in their Debian VCS or all upstream files from the > .orig.tar.gz. So would I, and most of the tools like git-buildpackage seem to assume it too and not try to support this case AFAICS. Colin's probably right that it's an issue religious wars can be fought over, but if they're being fought in the context of keeping package source in revision control it's happening quietly.. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature