Bug#250202: "debian/README.source" file for packages with non-trivial source
Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 10:54:06PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Accordingly, I think moving forward with specifying a README.source
>> file that explains the above three or four points is something we can
>> reach consensus on. I'm not as sure about standardizing a target for 1
>> (setup, unpack, and patch are all currently in use), but I suppose that
>> we could standardize on patched. This does raise insta-buggy issues
>> since existing packages don't provide that target.
> This is only a mild objection (I think this is too valuable a change for
> me to want to stand in its way), but I am curious why you picked a
> target name which AFAIK isn't used by more than a handful of existing
> packages, rather than one of the ones which are common? In the latter
> case, at least we'd have a head-start on implementation.
> (If patched is in use by one of the major patch systems today and I just
> forgot about it, please let me know.)
Part of the original thread was picking something that currently wasn't
used so that we could be assured that we weren't changing the semantics of
something already out there. However, we could standardize patch instead
of patched, which will pick up quilt and dpatch at least. It would cause
problems if one of the other systems used patch to mean something
different, but I'm not aware of one that does. dbs doesn't appear to.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: