Re: How can we make Debian packaging more standardised?
On 24.03.21 15:37, Simon Richter wrote:
> The vast majority of the software we ship works fine with a two-line
> systemd unit and three debhelper control files, and that is exactly what we
> should be using for these cases, but we cannot generalize that to a
> requirement, and people wishing to contribute to packages not served well
> by the abstraction will continue to need to look under the hood.
Not to diminish your detailed assessment (which I agree with), but just
to clarify: with "standardize", I was thinking more of a de-facto
standard as you describe it in the first sentence, and not a hard
I just vividly remember how difficult it used to be to contribute to
some of the other packages even as a DD, and appreciate how much easier
it has become.
And for packages that make use of Salsa's rich features (like merge
requests, pipelines, etc), I think the experience is even better.
Although I admit that this is highly subjective.
PS: I mentioned debhelper a few times, when I actually mean "dh".
Recognizing the fact that most software more or less follows one or the
other build procedure, auto-guessing it, and then enabling the escape
hatches that you mentioned was a brilliant idea.