Hi cstamas, On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 06:46:57PM +0100, Csillag Tamas wrote: > 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)
Sound great! I'm not entirely convineced that we should keep the exclude list in the copyright file but that's an implementation detail on the uscan end. I'll leave the bug open until we have a fixed devscripts in unstable. Thanks a lot for this! Cheers, -- Guido > > Regards, > cstamas > -- > CSILLAG Tamas (cstamas) - http://cstamas.hu/ > > "Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?" > -- Anon. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
