Re: cme and stylistic changes in team uploads
On الإثنين 26 كانون الأول 2016 06:50, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
On 25/12/16 23:51, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
I think it's enough consistency that people are either using dh_make,
debmake, or the debian-med packaging template and just adding to that.
If people were writing these packaging files from scratch, there would
be real consistency issues.
Come on, I am sure most people just copy an existing debianization that
is close enough to the package they intend to work on, despite our best
efforts to advise against doing so.
Either way, it's not written from scratch. This is beside the point
anyway and I think there's been too much digression.
[...]
I'd definitely not request the cme style while I'm recommending it to
newcommers for the said reasons. I'm usually doing it in team uploads
since up to now nobody expressed that its not wanted. I'd not use it
for instance on packages where you are Uploader and I know that you do
not like it.
Place yourself as a newcomer for a minute. You were advised to use cme
because whatever changes you make, you are guaranteed a well-formed
d/control or d/copyright, or else the software will scream at you.
You are now happy with your contribution and get it uploaded, only to be
publicly shamed on the team's mailing list for not respecting the main
uploader's custom style.
Now let me ask you this, does this sound like a great packaging
experience to you?
I agree with you 100% that it isn't and also made exactly the same point
in my previous message that you are making now. Please see the last part
of my previous message (not snipped from this reply).
[...]
I agree that can be helpful, but to me it's outweighed by the problems I
have with it.
The problem here is you putting comments in d/control to categorize
dependencies. This is highly non-standard. If you really want to do such
thing, then you should be using build profiles [1] which would bring
additional benefits.
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/BuildProfileSpec
Otherwise, your comments in d/control are just plain noise, I am afraid.
As I said, I'm not going to dispute particular points of style here.
This is a digression. I only named a couple of my problems with it here
to avoid derailing this thread. I think the specific issues are better
discussed with the cme developers.
[...]
I never observed this. Could you please give an example? That could
also be a topic for a bug report.
This is really not a big deal, but I was referring to something like:
[...]
where in the latter case, both lists are aligned. Again, not a very big
deal.
Not a very big deal indeed!
I didn't want to go deep into details, but I merely provided an answer
to a question I was asked.
[...]
-1. I think that requiring everyone to have to remember everyone else's
quirks will create huge barriers to teamwork over time, with the brunt
of the problems coming to newcomers who have enough to learn aside from
getting inside everyone's head. I'd like to agree with everyone on a
standard procedure.
We should all just "take one for the team" and stop this madness of
imposing one's style over a consistent one.
I would say "preserving" rather than "imposing", but sure. I'm sure you
would agree, though, that if I'm just making a team upload to fix a
problem in one of your packages, it wouldn't be a good idea for me to
also go through and change all your variable assignments from "A = B" to
"A=B" or vice versa or whatever.
I'm trying to make exactly this point. It's just that in this case, cme
fixes problems while also changing style. Because it's not the packager
actively changing these things as it is in my example with d/rules, it's
clear that my issues should have been taken up with the cme people and
not here.
Thanks and regards
Afif
--
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name
Reply to: