❦ 19 mai 2016 18:04 +0100, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> :
>> b) many upstreams appear frustrated about getting their package
>> officially supported in Debian. Sometimes there is good reason their
>> package doesn't belong in Debian but sometimes it is more about inertia
>> in Debian or the upstream isn't aware about backports and thinks their
>> package will be stuck at a particular version forever
>
> Providing a proper Debian source package is also a lot more work than
> writing some kind of ad-hoc build system that spits out a .deb or
> three.
Totally agree. Our standards are far too high for many upstreams.
I am always flabestered by the popularity of fpm to build Debian
packages (and by the increasing popularity of pleaserun by the same
author on the same concepts). It provides a way to easily build a Debian
package from a directory but produces somewhat crippled/incomplete
packages and is no help to us since it's completely outside of any of
our tools. It also handles RPM (and now other package formats), but I
don't think this would explain its popularity alone.
And there is also the lost cause of vendoring that gained even more
traction with Go but that was already a problem with the Java ecosystem.
I don't think there is much to do about this one.
--
Don't sacrifice clarity for small gains in "efficiency".
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature