On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:32:52AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote: > James McCoy wrote: > >Part of the reason I chose to use debian/upstream/ is that an extensible > >location for upstream related information (similar in spirit to > >debian/source/) could be useful. > > I've really wondered, why you didn't use debian/source/ for this purpose > and introduced another directory? Why not put the key used to sign the > upstream source right into debian/source/?
debian/source/ is for content related to the source package. debian/upstream/ would be for content related to upstream. There's a distinct separation there and as the signing key is, IMO, obviously upstream metadata it's not appropriate for debian/source/. The only relation it has to the source package is that it's used to verify one component of the source package. Cheers, -- James GPG Key: 4096R/331BA3DB 2011-12-05 James McCoy <james...@debian.org>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
