On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 02:18:08AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:10:04PM +0200, Alexis Murzeau wrote: > > I'm wondering why Vcs-* fields in debian/control (Vcs-Browser and/or > > Vcs-<type>) > > are not recommended (or maybe even strongly recommended) ? (I mean here > > that I think > > having Vcs-* fields should be recommended for active packages) > They are just information fields. You cannot fill them if you aren't using a > VCS. > And we cannot recommend using a VCS because we don't usually recommend > workflows. > > > I acknowledge that previously, packages might not have been developed using > > a VCS as said in the policy. But I think now most packages have a VCS where > > it is developed. > I'm sure (almost) all of these packages already have Vcs-* tags. > > > Also, I see some orphaned packages in the QA group now actively maintained > > without VCS, which seems counterproductive if someone else wants to > > contribute > > too. > > In that case, this would be almost like a NMU I guess, but against an > > "non official maintainer" with manual merges (or lost changes). > > > > Or maybe orphaned package with QA upload are not supposed to be always > > collaboratively maintained ? (I'm new to these concepts, but to me the > > response to this should be "no"). > I don't think anything is "supposed" here. We don't recommend workflows > and if you need to make just one upload for an orphaned package you don't > need to touch any VCS. And for packages without a repo somebody would need > to create one which is extra work when you need to make just one upload.
Please, pretty please, make `debcheckout <every_package>` possible Groeten Geert Stappers DD -- Silence is hard to parse
