On Mon, 6 Jun 2011 21:56:22 +0200, Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> wrote: > Why 3 below 5? Introducing a new field that must be filled in and kept (manually) in sync with information that is already present in the rules file just doesn't seem like a good solution. I'm less afraid of 4 than some people would be, particularly with some time to go before we'd think about freezing our next stable release. But 1 and 2 both seem plausible to me and would be much less disruptive. > Option 1 also implies forcing debian/rules to be a Makefile, which is > think is sensible. Right. This has always been part of Debian policy, and I have not been swayed by those who have tried to argue against it at various times. Bdale
Attachment:
pgpaZx9R821oa.pgp
Description: PGP signature