On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 08:36:45AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 11:02:35AM +0000, Mo Zhou wrote: > In such a large community of volunteers it may not be enough to propose > something that is only marginally better because the cost (even just in > cognitive terms) and effort required for so many individuals to overcome > inertia is relatively high.
Linus said that "Talk is cheap, show me the code." Now I have shown the code and nobody read that. The single-file format is not mandatory, and two convertion tools enables zero-cost convertion: https://github.com/dupr/duprkit/blob/master/bin/fold https://github.com/dupr/duprkit/blob/master/bin/unfold And the prototype implementation is compatible to the traditional debian/ directory. See https://github.com/dupr/DefaultCollection/tree/master/rover-traditional for the example. BOTH single-file format and traditional format are supported. People could choose and use what they like. I admit that I'm quite fond of the proposed single-file format, and hence didn't mention and compatiblity with traditional format in design. > I am not trying to discourage you from your effort, but rather advising > you that the chances of success would improve if you address the > principal obstacles to adoption in a holistic way. (As I already > pointed out, your current approach misses a great deal.) What else can I do? Both traditional and single-file formats are explicitly supported now.
