Hi! On Tue, 2023-11-28 at 14:57:10 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Dimitri John Ledkov <dimitri.led...@canonical.com> writes: > > Dak currently requires Checksums-Sha1, but I am happy to facilitate in > > patching dak to make Checksums-Sha1 optional if this bug report is > > accepted. > > The field is documented as mandatory precisely because DAK requires it, > which makes it mandatory for Debian packages. As soon as DAK doesn't > require it, I'm happy to make it optional (and indeed it would arguably be > a bug in Policy if it's optional in the archive but Policy claims it's > mandatory).
I'd like to drop those from .changes and .dsc (among other things), but demoting these which are currently marked as required to me implies a major format version bump. And I don't recall ever demoting required fields, only promoting fields from optional to required. For .changes, I've got this among other cleanups that would be nice to do to the format: https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/Spec/ChangesFormat2.0 but there did not seem to be much enthusiasm when I proposed this some time ago: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/04/msg00326.html For .dsc, there's the problem that, very confusingly the Format is used not for the file format, but for the source format, which I think was a mistake at the time, but here we are, see the .dsc section at: https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/TimeTravelFixes Thanks, Guillem
