On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 02:57:20PM +1000, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 01:35:22PM -0700, Michael Jennings wrote: > > On Tuesday, 10 June 2008, at 11:21:30 (+0200), > > Albin Tonnerre wrote: > > > > > Please, no. This was intentionnaly reverted because it causes a > > > build failure when using tarballs created by 'make distcheck', as > > > the debian dir is not included in them (on purpose) > > > > I still think this is a huge mistake. It's a very simple matter for > > someone who doesn't want to use it to "rm -rf" a debian/ hierarchy > > that is already there. > > > > It's a hell of a lot harder for someone who *does* want to use it to > > reproduce it out of thin air. > > First, up sorry for the bother. I didn't realise that there > was a new way to handle the Debian packaging wafting through > the archive. > > Secondly, perhaps it would be better to improve the packaging, > incoporating those changes being made by people maintaining pacakages > for Debian, rather than delete it all together. > > Its seems to me that being able to check out code from cvs and build a > debian package would be useful to some people. But perhaps I am the only > person in that category :-)
Ok, I've read the rest of the thread now :-) In respect to the statement that Debian has a rule about not shipping debian/ directories, thats a new one to me. But if that is the way that this project wants to do things, and the way that people actually doing the Debian packaging want things done, its certainly not for me to disagree. They are the ones doing the work. I'm just poking about having fun from time to time. Its not how I would do things. But that is more or less irrelevant. >From reading Raster's comments, I gleen that the idea is basically to leave the debian/ directroes in CVS, generally speaking containing a changelog.in but no changelog. And not distributing the debian/ directory in the tarball. For my own usage (sporadic as it is), this is fine. It would just be an incredible choore to have to go and recreate all the debian/ directories by hand. But if the data is in CVS, thats fine. Presumably there aren't any objections to making (minor) modifications to it such as fixing up build dependancies. Lastly with regards to consistancy and not having different subdirectories in the tree have different policies. I agree 100% -- Horms ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
