dput: Call for feedback: What should change? What should stay the same? (was: Trouble with debsign, dput)

[Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>]

Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofborg@debian.org> writes:

> (I don't want/care about a new flame war, I used dput for a while, and
> then switched to dput-ng after some issues I encountered that I can't
> recall now)

I recently donned the mantle of maintaining ‘dput’ and am carefully
making improvements. I am conscious of the special need for backward
compatibility so I am taking care to understand how the Debian developer
community uses it today.

So I'm now familiar enough, but still fresh enough, that feedback is
particularly valuable.

I'd like to take the opportunity of this thread to ask:


What does ‘dput’ do that you really think should not be changed?

What does ‘dput’ do that you wish it would stop doing?

What do other tools do better than ‘dput’? Do you think that ‘dput’
should change to do those things the same way?


The same questions can be asked of the ‘dcut’ program from the same
package.

-- 
 \     “Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.” —Pablo |
  `\                                                           Picasso |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney