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

Bug#250202: Alternate proposal



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 04:00:17PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> 
>>Hi,

Hi

[...]
> Anyway. Thanks to your excellent research in
> <87fyxwcee1.dancerj@netfort.gr.jp> in this bug (and your reminder on IRC
> that you did this :-), we know that the "patched" target is not used by
> any package yet. Thus, I'll modify the proposal that I set out in
> <20050426093217.GN4948@country.grep.be> to say the target should be
> "patched", rather than "source". For reference, the proposal as it now
> reads follows; as always, I'm looking for seconds.

Count me in.

> --- policy.sgml.orig	2005-06-12 11:18:28.000000000 +0200
> +++ policy.sgml	2005-06-12 11:19:47.000000000 +0200
> @@ -2098,6 +2098,43 @@
>  	  the file to the list in <file>debian/files</file>.</p>
>        </sect>
>  
> +      <sect id="readmesource">
> +        <heading>Source package handling: <file>debian/README.source</file></heading>
> +	<p>
> +	  It is assumed that for any Debian package, by running
> +	  <prgn>dpkg-source -x</prgn> one can edit files in the
> +	  package and build a modified version. This is a good thing;
> +	  it allows people not familiar with the package to easily
> +	  edit it to prepare non-maintainer uploads, security uploads,
> +	  or local modified versions; it also easily allows people to
> +	  automatedly audit the source, or to generate statistics over
> +	  a large portion of the source packages in the
> +	  archive. Maintainers should, therefore, try to avoid doing
> +	  anything which might break this assumption.</p>
> +	<p>
> +	  If, even after this warning, a maintainer still chooses to
> +	  do so by either creating the layout of the source package
> +	  such that running <prgn>dpkg-source -x</prgn> does not
> +	  render editable source, or by managing files anywhere in the
> +	  package in such a way that running
> +	  <prgn>dpkg-buildpackage</prgn> may overwrite changes, then
> +	  they should create a file <file>debian/README.source</file>
> +	  documenting the way the source package is structured; such a
> +	  file would typically explain to someone not familiar with
> +	  the package how to create a modified version of the
> +	  package. It would also document any gotchas one might
> +	  encounter.</p>
> +	<p>
> +	  In addition, maintainers should create a target
> +	  <tt>patched</tt> to the <prgn>debian/rules</prgn> file. This
> +	  target, if present, should unpack source archives, apply
> +	  patches, generate files, and generally prepare the unpacked
> +	  source package to modification. Running <prgn>debian/rules
> +	  binary</prgn> after <prgn>debian/rules patched</prgn>
> +	  <em>must not</em> erase any changes, and it must also not
> +	  fail.
> +	</p>
> +
>      </chapt>
> 

Seconded.

Cheers

Luk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCrSND5UTeB5t8Mo0RAlsrAKDIu/+02TuTusdzPxlMitSWyveugACgxrmm
P3zd/huyybxS3HKOnyQv3xM=
=qEUu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: