On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:40:22AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Andrej Shadura writes ("Re: Consensus Call: Git Packaging Round 1"): > > I noticed some people [citation needed] think it is not important to > > preserve pristine upstream tarballs with the move to Git, and it's > > okay to regenerate them from a Git branch without trying to preserve > > checksums of the tarballs upstream has somehow generated. > > I am one of these people. I have always been sceptical of the need to > preserve upstream pristine tarballs.
I just wanted to leave a note to the effect that I have some cases where I think this remains useful. In deference to Sam's organisation of the discussion I'll refrain from getting into them just now. > I haven't been vocal about this because no-one is forcing anyone to > publish pristine tarballs. So in any situation where the maintainer > doesn't want to pay the costs of preserving pristine upstream > tarballs, the maintainer can simply not do so. > > That overall stance has a lot of social value for the project, because > it means we can all cooperate without having to have this debate. We > can save our energy for doing something more useful. I definitely agree with this position. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org]