Re: 1.0 format with direct changes in diff (Was: Debian Trends updated)
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 01:09:43PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 09/04/21 at 12:33 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:42:22AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > I don't think there's a valid technical reason to not use a newer format.
> > > Some dislike the choices made and the fact that many new features are
> > > coupled to the new format, but there's really nothing that you could do
> > > with the old format than you can't do now with new ones.
> >
> > I suspect people resent being chastised to "separate patches" as the
> > toolage used to scream at you when using 3.0 + single-debian-patch.
>
> Can you give an example?
Recently fixed so it's no longer a concern in Bullseye -- that's why I said
"used to", in past tense. Still, a lot of developers use Buster and older
on their boxes.
IIRC such messages were given by:
* patch header
* lintian
* mentors.debian.net
But even if the messages are gone now, people still remember being told so.
Another sometimes mentioned downside of 3.0+s-d-p is doubling the debian/
directory if it's present in upstream releases. I believe this is a bogus
reason as all these files are supposed to be tiny.
Meow!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ .--[ Makefile ]
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ # beware of races
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ all: pillage burn
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ `----
Reply to: