Hi Guido, On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:48:57PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:41:40 +0100, Guido Günther wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:38:21AM +0100, Csillag Tamas wrote: > > > If you agree that it should be done this way (as you can read in the > > > paragraph > > > above) I am happy to work on uscan then the patch for git-buildpackage > > > can be > > > better. > > I think extending uscan is the only sensible way to go. Scraping command > > output is way to fragile. > > I completely agree.
I talked with Gregor and created a blogpost which is (i think) good summary. http://cstamas.hu/blog/posts/Standard_mechanism_for_repacking_upstream_tarballs_in_debian/ TL;DR: Here is proposal for modifying uscan http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685787 (by others, I also sent a bugfix a few minutes ago) Regards, cstamas -- CSILLAG Tamas (cstamas) - http://cstamas.hu/ "Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?" -- Anon.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
