On Wed, Sep 23 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> And that, I think, may serve as a guiding criteria for whether >> one should make a package native or not. With my native packages >> (kernel-package, ucf, and devotee), I do not _have_ an upstrem process, >> nor an upstream "distribution" or tarball; and thus there is no >> difference in process for a packaging change or a feature addition -- >> which makes it clear to me that these are native packages. > > Whenever you guys bring the argument of convenience to make a package > native, I imagine that RedHat, Novell and company did the same with > half of GNOME packages, and I had to look at Fedora and SuSE's pages > checking for updates, report bugs in their bugzillas, look if a new > upstream version only changed the spec file or also the code, and I > want to cry myself to sleep.
I think you have not looked at the details of what I said: very little of my argument has to do with convenience; it has to do with artifacts of a separate upstream entity. If the package does exist as an upstream entity, it will be reflected in the processs; and the lack of such a process (having an upstream tarball that is available separate from the debian upload, for instance) serves as a hint. Convenience has little to do with it. manoj ps: The new devotee package, for instance, is unlikely to remain a debian native, since it would make sense to have it not tied only to debian. Again, convenience does not enter the equation. -- linux: the choice of a GNU generation (k...@cis.ufl.edu put this on Tshirts in '93) Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org