Re: Bug#762228: RFS: ufoai-music review
On 2014-09-20 17:33, Markus Koschany wrote:
> On 20.09.2014 15:45, Tobias Frost wrote:
>> Due to the split I say "we now have 4 related, but independent source
>> packages and they should be handled as such".
>> The Relation is no guarantee that the packages will not diverge in the
>> future. (e.g code could go forward, while data keeps the same, or vice
>> verse)
>
> Nope, those packages will always be kept in sync with src:ufoai. They
> are not independent source packages and you should simply trust me with
> that statement.
That's the point -- from the POV of the Debian archive, those *are*
independent source packages, regardless of your intentions.
That's why the "cleanliness" of the split is being emphasized so much
here. Nobody is disputing your decision to split (on the contrary I'd
say), but the technical result should conform to what is expected of
*any* source package.
On a side note, there is the possibility that "always be kept in sync"
might not make sense, for example when a hypothetical 2.5.1 release does
not change anything in -music or -maps. (But I may have misunderstood
how far you mean the sync to go).
Christian
Reply to: