]] Matthew Vernon > Andrey Rahmatullin <w...@debian.org> writes: > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 08:54:50AM +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote: > >> It's probably unfashionable, but I think debian/patches is not a great > >> way to manage changes, particularly if you're using a VCS for > >> maintaining your packages. As others have pointed out in this thread, > >> doing this means you end up essentially trying to version-control your > >> patches twice - once in the source package, and once in the VCS. > > That's just a consequence of using two different storage formats for your > > packages: a Debian source package and a VCS. As long as both of them are > > widely > > used and incompatible, problems will exist in some form when using both. > > By e.g. merging all patches in the Debian source package into one big diff > > you are just breaking one of these two storage formats for that package, > > essentially mandating the usage of the other one (the VCS) for most of the > > developer operations with it. > > I'm not sure that's entirely true; but even if it were, is that an > entirely unreasonable position for a package maintainer (or team > thereof) to take?
My problem with it is that we're then saying that we're not shipping the source (as in, preferred form for modification). This might be ok, but then we should make sure that the «actual» source is available elsewhere, which means it needs to be somewhere we manage, and treat source packages as generated artifacts that can't be turned back into the actual source. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
