Hi, On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 9:33 PM Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> wrote: > > We should define native and non-native > packages in terms of version numbers, and allow both native and non-native > packages to use single-tarball source package formats.
I co-maintaintain several Debian-internal tools, and that description is backwards. "Native" sources are characterized by their lack of Debian patches. On that note, the term "native" is also not great. The words "patched" and "unpatched" describe the relationship between sources in the archive and their respective upstreams more accurately. As for version strings, we need no additional restrictions. The use of patches is declared in source format 3.0. Some folks even use Debian revisions for unpatched sources. [1] Most significantly, Lintian's parser is unable to deduce "nativeness" from the version number. The native status is a required input! [2] Please do not "define" a source's patch status via the version string. It's what got us here in the first place. Debian version numbers are complicated enough already. Thank you! Kind regards, Felix Lechner [1] for example, https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python3-defaults [2] https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/blob/master/lib/Lintian/Changelog/Version.pm#L79-80
