Re: source package structure
>>>>> "Raul" == Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:
Raul> [This is not about source package format.] Currently, the
Raul> debian/ directory goes inside the source directory, and we
Raul> sometimes can't use pristine upstream sources because they
Raul> don't conform to our standards.
Raul> The obvious way to fix this is: have a standard for the
Raul> debian source directory, and unpack the pristine upstream
Raul> sources into it.
Raul> Note that if we went this direction (and doing this right
Raul> would involve some careful planning), this would also
Raul> address current silliness, like debian/rules creating .deb
Raul> files, etc. in the parent directory.
Raul> Here's a draft idea, please poke holes in it:
I have comments, first step is to understand the proposal though.
Raul> [1] keep current directory naming convention. [2] keep
Raul> debian/ as a sub directory of main directory. [3] unpack
Raul> pristine sources in the source/ directory [4] Where upstream
Raul> sources include a debian/ directory, implement as active
Raul> debian/ directory using a symlink. [5] distribute the
Raul> debian directory as small, independent tarball. Even where
Raul> it's just a symlink. [6] generated files (.deb, .tar.gz,
Raul> .dsc, etc.) should all be created inside the main directory,
Raul> but outside the debian/ and source/ directories. [7]
Raul> migrating to this standard should be associated with a new
Raul> major release of policy (with all the associated delays --
Raul> we're going to have some delays anyways just waiting for our
Raul> build tools to be able to recognize and deal with this.).
Trying to understand this directory structure (do I have this
correct?):
xyz-0.0/ [1]
xyz-0.0/debian/ [2] could be symlink to source/debian [4]
xyz-0.0/source/ [3] pristine source
tar -C xyz-0.0 -cvzf debian.tar.gz debian [5]
xyz-0.0/debian.tar.gz [6]
xyz-0.0/xyz_0.0-1.deb
xyz-0.0/xyz_0.0-1.diff.gz
xyz-0.0/xyz_0.0-1_i386.changes
xyz-0.0/xyz_0.0-1_i386.dsc
xyz-0.0/xyz_0.0.orig.tar.gz
You say that this isn't meant to change the source code format, but
[2], [4] and [5] seem to be saying otherwise.
--
Brian May <bam@debian.org>
Reply to: