Hello, On Mon 20 Jun 2022 at 05:31PM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> BEGIN BALLOT
>
> Using its powers under constitution 6.1.5, the Technical Committee
> issues the following advice:
>
> 1. It is not a bug of any severity for a package with a non-native
> version number to use a native source package format.
>
> 2. Thus, we think that dpkg shouldn't issue warnings, or otherwise
> complain, when a non-native version number is used w/ 3.0 (native).
>
> 3. We suggest that the wontfix tag on #737634 be reconsidered.
>
> 4a. We believe that there are indeed circumstances in which
> 1.0-with-diff is the best choice for a particular source package,
> including, but not limited to, git-first packaging workflows.
>
> This is because there is currently no other source format which is
> such that avoid both (i) uploading the whole source, including
> upstream, for every upload; and (ii) having to maintain
> debian/patches/ inside the package tree.
>
> 4c. We believe that there are indeed circumstances in which
> 1.0-with-diff is the best choice for a particular source package,
> including, but not limited to, git-first packaging workflows.
> However, we recommend discontinuing use of 1.0-with-diff in other
> circumstances, to simplify the contents of the archive.
>
> This is because ... [second paragraph as in 4a].
>
> 5. We decline to comment on the recent source package format MBF.
>
> Option A -- issue items 1-3, 4a and 5
>
> Option C -- issue items 1-3, 4c and 5
>
> Option X -- issue only items 1, 2, 3 and 5
>
> Option N -- none of the above.
>
> END BALLOT
I vote
A > C > X > N
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
