Re: Bug#1007717: Draft resolution for "Native source package format with non-native version"
Hello,
On Tue 07 Jun 2022 at 07:43am +02, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> While I can agree with this item on a technical level, I think there is
> more to it than that and I am wondering whether it sends the "right"
> message.
>
> Sometimes, things we do are technically possible and fill a niche well.
> Yet, we decide that it is no longer reasonable to continue supporting
> them and remove their support despite the feature being useful to some.
> Quite clearly, there is a trade-off involved here. Continuing to support
> 1.0-with-diff comes with a cost that reduces uniformity inside the
> archive. Evidently, this is what motivated Lucas to file the MBF
> initially. My experience is that lack of uniformity is a significant
> barrier to prospective contributors to Debian.
I think this argument needs to be made more precise -- we should be
clearer about why this particular un-uniformity is bad. I don't think
the issue for new contributors is persuasive enough, as new contributors
can mostly ignore source packages. It's not like, e.g., debhelper
vs. cdbs. I haven't yet seen an argument that the lack of uniformity is
doing anyone's work any harm comparable to the harm done to things like
what Ian and Sam want to do.
> Exploring different technical approaches does have value as well, but I
> think we've had sufficient time to consider the various advantages and
> disadvantages of various source packages formats. On a whole, it seems
> to me that that the number of packages benefiting from 1.0-with-diff is
> relatively small.
I agree, it's not about the benefits of the source format, we do indeed
understand all the trade-offs by now. It's that certain ideas and
workflows *which are not really about source packages* are made
inconvenient or impossible if we remove this option. In other words, it
needs to be replaced before it can be deprecated.
> What would you think about adding an alternative option 4?
>
> 4b. We believe that there are indeed circumstances in which
> 1.0-with-diff is the best choice for a particular source package.
> Given that the number of packages for which this is relevant is
> fairly small, we recommend discontinuing use of 1.0-with-diff to
> gain more uniformity.
Thanks for coming up with the text. I'd say that as uniformity is not
good in itself, it would be good to have more concrete reasons for
wanting uniformity in this case documented in this bug (not necessarily
in the resolution text) before we add it to the ballot.
--
Sean Whitton
Reply to: