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

Re: Direct commits to packages' VCS (Was: DEP1: Non Maintainer Uploads)

On 12/08/08 at 12:25 -0300, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 11:09:09AM -0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > However, I don't think that it's the main purpose of
> > debian/README.source (which is to document how to get the source of the
> > package ready for editing).  Whether to encourage direct commits is
> Not only, quoting from policy:
>   `debian/README.source' may also include any other information that
>   would be helpful to someone modifying the source package.

Sure, but with the way the policy is currently written, it's still not
the _main purpose_ of debian/README.source.

I agree that this is probably a bug in policy, and that this should
probably be fixed, so that debian/README.source becomes the place to
document everything related to a specific package's development (use of
patch systems, branch layout in the VCS repository, acceptance of
non-maintainer commits, etc.). Also, maybe it's still time to switch to
a different, machine-parseable format.

Looking at the 306 source packages using README.source (see
gluck:~lucas/readme.source), it's obvious that the lack of guidelines on
how to use this file is limiting its usefulness (unless the goal is to
generate lots of variants of quilt howtos ;)

> NMUers are modifying source packages, so in theory there they can also
> find info targeted to them. But I agree that it is somehow blurry if
> that info belong to that file or not. So if you want to drop it, drop
> it, we can postpone the change.

I don't garantee that I'll accept it, but could you prepare a patch
that would mention README.source, staying vague on the gory details?
You can use gluck:~lucas/pkgs.dbk as a basis.
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: