Hi Danny, On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 01:12:11PM +0200, Danny Edel wrote: > I was surprised to see the reaction my comments generated and like > Gianfranco, I also want to ask Marc to consider rethinking his decision. > I do not think you are spoiling the fun or that insisting on > oldfashioned keeping is a bad thing. I apologize that my choice of > words made you feel that way - I am not a native english speaker either, > so it may have sounded different than I intended.
It was not your choice of words that made me decide to pull out. I just tend to not spend time on work that others can do faster and better. It is not that I am dying of boredom while not working on borgbackup ;-) > I chose github as a mirror because I have upload rights there, that's > the only reason. I would also prefer to work on *.debian.org and I will > do so once I have permission. I just thought hosting git repo online > somewhere makes looking at it easier than sending stuff by mail, and > using github seemed like the easier choice than hosting and maintaining > a git browser myself. Since git clones contain the entire history, > switching mirrors shouldn't be complicated once upload permission is > granted. You're fully right. > I chose the "ignore upstream tarball/use git tag" method also just > because it was simpler. Had I imported the release tarball, I would > have had to maintain the list of files that are auto-generated (a simple > *.c won't do, for example _chunker.c is handwritten), and add rules to > remove them from the build dir or change their timestamp so that they > get refreshed at build-time. I understand. Doing such kind of cleanup in debian/rules is just fine. And yes, a list of files needs to be maintained. I am not sure whether the "use git tag" strategy will interfere with Debian's current goal of reproducible builds. If you stay with the strategy, please document this. I think there is a debian/README.source standardized file for such things. > Not having them in the first place made that unnecessary. That's > the reason why upstream git tag seemed easier to create a working > example implementation of the "regenerate files" idea. > > The git tag is gpg-signed with the same key as the tar.gz release, so I > don't really see the difference in authenticity You're right. > Or am I getting this wrong? Not at all. You do the work, you decide. I might have another opinion, but that's just an opinion that you're free to ignore. Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Leimen, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421
