On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 04:38:27PM -0400, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 01:50:20PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > > > One additional thing I'd like to raise is the need for additional > > metadata to make better use of the VCS repository: > > > - upstream branch > > - debian branch > > - possibly additional branches e.g. upstream stable/development > > branches, and also debian stable/unstable/experimental branches > > I don't think this stuff is relevant to keep in debian/control; the Debian > branch is the only one that maintainers should have to care about. At > *most*, we should only be encoding the upstream branch corresponding to the > current package, but I'm not keen on this either. If one is using a tool such as git-buildpackage, the "debian" and "upstream" branches are the *minimum* required information however. IMO these need to be spelled out explicitly in order to build a correct package. Obviously the maintainer knows what these are, and more often an not they are "master" and "upstream" in any case, which matches the defaults. But this falls apart as soon as you stop using the defaults, which is why I would like to see these two bits of information in debian/control. One branch could potentially be encoded in the Git URI, but you really need both. The other information is less useful, but I would very much appreciate the information to allow tools to be written to use it (but this is a less immediate concern). Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature