On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 10:13:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > This is what diferentiates is from uscan; indeed, I use uscan in > the cases where I provide the target, The target unpacks the > raw upstream source, munges it (by, say, removing a subdir which has > non-dfsg stuff, or removes the debian dir, applies patches, or whatever > other processing is required.
> There is no need to do this for the current version; the mungeds > sources already are an apt-get source away. For several packages I (co)maintain where I have to munge the upstream tarball, the standard procedure (inherited from past maintainers) is: - increment the version number in the debian packaging - call the get-orig-source target I think it's perfectly reasonable to want the get-orig-source target to give you a *specified* version of an upstream tarball, rather than the *newest* version of an upstream tarball. Packaging a new upstream version doesn't necessarily mean packaging the latest that uscan can find. It's also useful for third parties to be able to easily examine the provenance of specific Debian tarballs. A get-orig-source target provides a much more concise description of the Debian changes than examining the diff between the two tarballs. So I certainly agree that uscan doesn't obsolete the get-orig-source target, but I disagree that it's not useful to have such a target generate a tarball for the 'current' upstream version. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
