On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 10:18:38AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I don't think this is horribly relevant to what we're discussing, namely
> how to go about packaging software for inclusion in Debian. Generating
> upstream-provided packages that don't meet Debian Policy and therefore
> won't be inc
Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Huh? I, as a user, routinely use upstream-provided debian/ directory to
> create packages for some software (most frequently mplayer). So those
> are not assumptions but facts.
> And as a user, I can say that if e.g. the debian mplayer maintainer
> consi
Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 05:04:17PM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
>
>> Gabor Gombas wrote:
>> > You seem to make the mistake to think that the debian/ directory
>> > provided by upstream is there to help the distro maintainer.
>> [false assumptions]
>
> Huh? I, as a user, ro
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 05:04:17PM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Gabor Gombas wrote:
> > You seem to make the mistake to think that the debian/ directory
> > provided by upstream is there to help the distro maintainer.
> [false assumptions]
Huh? I, as a user, routinely use upstream-provided deb
Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Russ Allbery [Wed, 26 Dec 2007 11:35:53 -0800]:
>> I also considered making several of the packages that I maintain
>> native, since I keep the debian directory in the upstream VCS, but
>> decided against it becaues of this, and also because Debian als
Gabor Gombas wrote:
> You seem to make the mistake to think that the debian/ directory
> provided by upstream is there to help the distro maintainer.
[false assumptions]
I remove the upstream debian/ directory because the program that
create the diff.gz (dpkg-deb ?) does not record *removal* of
* Russ Allbery [Wed, 26 Dec 2007 11:35:53 -0800]:
> I also considered making several of the packages that I maintain native,
> since I keep the debian directory in the upstream VCS, but decided against
> it becaues of this, and also because Debian also often needs new releases
> that are meaningle
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 04:32:39PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-26 at 14:23 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:17:16PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > I'd just add:
> > > * it isn't in the spirit of free software to make it hard for others to
> > > use t
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 03:16:36PM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> I can tell you that this is not a easy way to cleanly package these
> softwares. I did not talk to upstream yet because I would like to present
> them new clean packages. Nevertheless, for now, I need to recreate a
> X.Y.Z+debian
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 04:32:39PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
In general, you seem to rant about a lot of things that may make sense
on their own, but they do not seem to have _anything_ to do with a
package being Debian-native or not. More specifically, you try to imply
that a package being vers
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 15:23:32 +0100, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Oh, I agree. I was only talking about a situation in which the Debian
>> maintainer of a given package is the very same person as the upstream
>> developer.
> E
On Wed, 2007-12-26 at 14:23 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:17:16PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
> > I'd just add:
> > * it isn't in the spirit of free software to make it hard for others to
> > use the code - making a package Debian-native when it could work on any
> > GN
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 15:23:32 +0100, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Oh, I agree. I was only talking about a situation in which the Debian
> maintainer of a given package is the very same person as the upstream
> developer.
Even in this case, I think one should consider making
On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 03:16:36PM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Anyone who wants to package your source for something else than Debian
> > is then free to completely and utterly ignore your debian/ directory...
>
> I'm trying to package two softwares where upstream
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Anyone who wants to package your source for something else than Debian
> is then free to completely and utterly ignore your debian/ directory...
I'm trying to package two softwares where upstream
1) puts its debian/ directory in their releases (X.Y.Z)
2) provides non-nat
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:17:16PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
>> Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Neil Williams wrote:
i.e. native should be a last resort - used only when it is all but
impossible for the package to be used outside Debian or some distro
fundamentally ba
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:35:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> tags 457353 + wontfix
> thanks
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 07:20:57PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > You're missing a .diff.gz, which means that this is a native package. This
> > package is in no way specific to Debian, w
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:17:16PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
> > Neil Williams wrote:
> >> i.e. native should be a last resort - used only when it is all but
> >> impossible for the package to be used outside Debian or some distro
> >> fundamentally based on Debian like Ubuntu.
On Sun Dec 23 15:26, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:35:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, but I disagree with this interpretation. For me a Debian native
> > package is a package which contains the official debian packaging stuff
> > in the upstream tarbal
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 08:01:02PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> I thought this consensus was already a fact and that some maintainers
> just disagree and nobody forced them to change yet...
Well, before forcing them to change we need a place where it is written
that the practice is front, don't we?
(
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 09:06:07PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> [N.B. I am subscribed to -devel; please do not CC me if you are following
> up there. ]
[ As you wish, but notice that I didn't have the chance of knowing that
upon my first Cc. I Cc-ed you as bug submitter. Dropping the Cc now.
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 08:16:07PM +0100, Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> >>> Sorry, but I disagree with this interpretation. For me a Debian native
> >>> package is a package which contains the official debian packaging stuff
> >>> in the upstream tarball. Since I'm also upstream for gdome2-xslt and
brian m. carlson wrote:
> It is my impression that this is the case already, but Policy is silent
> on the issue; I checked before I filed the bug. Perhaps if a consensus
> can be reached a guideline should be placed in Policy so that people are
> not further confused.
Please see [0], on this sa
[N.B. I am subscribed to -devel; please do not CC me if you are
following up there. ]
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:35:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
There are other examples of packages in the archive which are no way
Debian specific, but which are native as gdome2-xslt is; a fresh exampl
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:35:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> Sorry, but I disagree with this interpretation. For me a Debian native
>> package is a package which contains the official debian packaging stuff
>> in the upstream tarball. Since I'm also upstream fo
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 07:35:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I disagree with this interpretation. For me a Debian native
> package is a package which contains the official debian packaging stuff
> in the upstream tarball. Since I'm also upstream for gdome2-xslt and the
> soft
Luk Claes wrote:
> Neil Williams wrote:
>> i.e. native should be a last resort - used only when it is all but
>> impossible for the package to be used outside Debian or some distro
>> fundamentally based on Debian like Ubuntu.
>>
> I thought this consensus was already a fact and that some maintaine
Luk Claes wrote:
>> Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>>> Sorry, but I disagree with this interpretation. For me a Debian native
>>> package is a package which contains the official debian packaging stuff
>>> in the upstream tarball. Since I'm also upstream for gdome2-xslt and the
>>> software has been use
Neil Williams wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> tags 457353 + wontfix
>> thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 07:20:57PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
>>> You're missing a .diff.gz, which means that this is a native package. This
>>> package is in no way specific to Debian, which means that
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> tags 457353 + wontfix
> thanks
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 07:20:57PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
>> You're missing a .diff.gz, which means that this is a native package. This
>> package is in no way specific to Debian, which means that this shouldn't be
>> a Debi
tags 457353 + wontfix
thanks
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 07:20:57PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> You're missing a .diff.gz, which means that this is a native package. This
> package is in no way specific to Debian, which means that this shouldn't be
> a Debian-native package.
Sorry, but I disa
31 matches
Mail list logo
