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

Re: dpkg-source's future and relation with VCS

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 02:46:33PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> However I'm also convinced that:
> - a source package should be unpackable without a VCS. This means that
>   somehow it should contain a checkout that can be extracted with basic
>   tools. [1]

I don't think it's feasible to require that. It's a great goal, but
we're not there, and may not be there by lenny; and having a better
source format for lenny+1 is more important than that goal.

> - it will take several years until we can standardize on VCS-based source

I don't think we have a VCS-equilvaent source package format that's worth
considering standardising on: .tgz and .orig/.diff aren't powerful enough,
git and bzr are too system specific, and wig&pen is too unimplemented.

So while I'm not exactly disagreeing with either premise, I don't think
it makes sense to consider them atm. If they do eventually work out, to
the point that dpkg will auto convert VCS-managed repos to tar+patches
and back again in useful and convenient ways, then we can start REJECTing
.git/.bzr/.hg/whatever uploads that we will have been accepting in the
meantime, and expect maintainers to do that.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: