Hello, On Sun 14 Jul 2019 at 09:31AM -07, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> writes: > >>> From Debian policy 4.4.0 paragraph 5.6.26: >>> >>> More than one different VCS may be specified for the same package. > >> Right, and apparently I seconded that change, with this very confused >> wording :/, although my reading is different: as in diffferent VCS >> types are allowed, which would be consistent with the current behavior. >> But even then I'm not sure what's the point alogether. At a minimum >> this sentences needs to be clarified, or maybe just entirely dropped, >> as it looks very confusing? > > Yeah, this just seems generally wrong to me. I assume the idea was that a > package may have mirrors of its packaging repository in multiple VCS > systems and list all of them, but I'm dubious there's much point. My > leaning is to make the following change: > > diff --git a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst > index 81b3542..d491d57 100644 > --- a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst > +++ b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst > @@ -979,7 +979,10 @@ repository where the Debian source package is developed. > or ``hg clone`` command. If no branch is specified, the packaging > should be on the default branch. > > - More than one different VCS may be specified for the same package. > + Only one ``Vcs-<type>`` field should be given for a package. If the > + package is maintained in multple version control systems, the > + maintainer should specify the one that they would prefer other people > + to use as the basis for proposing changes to the package. This is more than the minimal change required to fix this bug. It seems like a good idea on a first look, but we should see if we're going to make any packages buggy by introducing a 'should' requirement here. -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature