Hi,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:28:34AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> If the packaging folder stays until the package reaches Debian, that's
> fine. However, if it stays after that, it's bad to have it upstream,
> even if it's not conflicting with our workflow. Why? Well, simply
> because instead of a single place where to contribute to the packaging,
> you now have 2: one upstream, and one in Debian. Once one or the other
> gets updated, who's going to do the work of propagating the change in
> the other place where the packaging information is stored? What's the
> point of having double the work to update the debian folder in both
> Debian and upstream? Just get that done in Debian, and that's it...
+1
I see no motivation on the upstream site to follow different Debian
revisions, closing bugs in the debian/changelog etc. Thus a single
place of maintenance is best maintained in a repository controled by
Debian (and I keep on asking upstream to follow this advise even if
source format 3.0 can deal with it).
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150610062931.gb15...@an3as.eu
