Re: Is there any point in loading SVN with outdated upstream source?
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:21:09PM +0200, Christophe Prud'homme wrote:
> good point. It should indeed be removed
> must have been there for a long time before I learned about the -o option
> from svn-buildpackage
thanks for the clarification. However, my question had a more general
part: Is it OK to simply delete upstream code of *any* package I might
stumble upon from our SVN in case I would stumble upon it = I can safely
assume it is there rather by accident?
I would really like to do so without asking maintainer / list because
usually this code can simply be restored either from upstream or from
spnapshot.debian.org - so no real harm should be caused, thought. If a
maintainer has really good reasons to keep this code I would suggest
droping a file "README.Status" in the branch/ dir to inform others about
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Andreas Tille <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I stumbled upon
> > svn+ssh://
> > svn.debian.org/svn/debian-science/packages/arpack/branches/upstream
> > which is featuring 75MByte of code which is definitely not Debian
> > packaging related. This code is probably wasting useless space on
> > several harddiscs of developers who have a complete checkout of Debian
> > Science SVN. I would love if we could agree to not keep this code
> > inside SVN. If there is really a need to keep upstream code the
> > packaging of this software should probably be moved to Git where it
> > is policy to keep upstream code anyway.
> > I guess arpack is just an example and I would love if others would
> > check their packages whether some cleanup would be possible.
> > Kind regards
> > Andreas.
> > --
> > http://fam-tille.de