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

Re: RFS: b5

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 08:12:45PM +0200, Panu Kalliokoski wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 06:57:38PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > Having the debian/ directory under version control is useful.  But it
> > shouldn't be included in the tarball when you run "make dist".
> I've never used "make dist",

Well, whatever command you use to create the release tarball then. ;-)

> because there has been nothing I deemed worth purging from the distribution.

Version control crap should not be in the tarball at least.  Lintian will warn
about it, too.

> > No, it's not especially vulnerable, but because of the strong advise to
> > use pristine sources, it's the only part that can actually be split off.
> > Also, splitting the package in many pieces makes it very hard to get and
> > install all the pieces, and you probably don't want to inflict that on
> > your users. ;-)
> Well, that's exactly the reason I'm reluctant to split the source: if
> you can do perfectly well with one source tarball (for debian users,
> non-debian users, and the build system), why not do that?

Users of a distribution and users of tarballs are very different.  Debian
users don't need the tarballs, the tarball users don't need the debian stuff.
So the people either download your debian package, or the tarball (and in that
case they don't care about the diff.gz).  So it doesn't actually get harder
for them.

> Note that I'm not going to take the debian/ dir away from my _real_ release
> sources; just from the Debian source packages, if Debian really strongly
> encourages that.

Oh no, please don't.  You should use the same release tarball for Debian that
you actually release.  That's what "pristine source tarball" means.  If you
decide that you want to release the debian/ directory, then it should be in
the tarball (and you probably end up with an empty diff.gz).  I would advise
against it, but not strongly. ;-)  I would advise strongly against a native
package, though.


I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: