Control: tags -1 buster-ignore Hi,
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 12:54:59PM +1300, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > It's true, however, that the Debian policy specifies built-using is for > copyright reasons. Please note that policy says 'license or DFSG requirements to provide full source code', not only license. But policy doesn't clarify what that means in practice. > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html# > additional-source-packages-used-to-build-the-binary-built-using > > Specifically, the last pargraph reads: > > > This field should not be added solely for purposes other than > > satisfying license or DFSG requirements to provide full source > > code. In particular, it should not be added solely to enable finding > > packages that should be rebuilt against newer versions of their build > > dependencies. > > Yet, from what I understand, that is *exactly* how that field is used in > the golang team. Is that correct? > > It should be noted this is a SHOULD NOT and not a MUST NOT, so it's a > little more relaxed - may we are allowed to abuse it like this. > > I do wonder if it's deliberate, however. It seems to me this should be > clarified, both in dh-golang and in policy, either way. > > > It's a pretty recent change in policy to clarify that how go packages use it > is > not the intended use. When go packages started using Built-Using, they were > 100% compliant with the wording (if not the intent) of policy :) Whatever the outcome of this discussion, changing something for buster is too late, so I'm tagging this bug buster-ignore. Thanks, Ivo
