On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 22:17:58 +0100, Rafael Laboissière wrote: > YMMV, but I would rather prefer to keep BuildSystem and Sequence codes in > separated files. It is more logical and improves maintainability. The > burden of having both --buildsystem and --with options in debian/rules is > not that big. We will do the change once for all packages and forget it > forever. I played with it a bit and looked at other packages and I guess I agree. I thought surely a buildsystem should be able to alter the sequence, but that doesn't seem to be the convention. I'm happy to go along with the community best practices. What do you think about having a clean function (as you have it now) versus a dh_octave_clean helper? Is it better to have fine grained explicit helper scripts or only when the steps become complex? Is it acceptable to have the sequence plugin conditionally insert dh_octave_check based on the "nocheck" option? -- mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature