Re: Bug#515856: Debian Policy 220.127.116.11 released
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 15:40:54 +0200
- From: Bill Allombert <ballombe@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bug#515856: Debian Policy 18.104.22.168 released
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:18:32PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:58:53AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > >
> > > Imho Sean's last mail sums it up pretty well
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=515856#94
> > I have read this, but it does not convince me. My rule to get the
> > upstream packagage was always: use uscan, if d/watch exists, otherwise
> > use get-orig-source. Sounds pretty simple and straigt-forward. If it
> > fails, I had a starting point where to debug (usually just a missing
> > dep). I see no reaso why this should be given up.
> I agree with Ole. While I took over some ideas from this thread how to
> get rid of some get-orig-source targets by using mode=git I think it
> makes perfectly sense to define a target name that should be used in
> case uscan can not be used exclusively to fetch upstream source. I can
> not see in how far definition of the target name will harm - but from
> the point of team maintenance it helps to know where to look first to
> download a new upstream version.
> BTW, I have standardized all my packages to
> . debian/get-orig-source
> In other words: I'm fine with removing the target in rules and replace
> it by:
> If there are reasons why uscan can not fetch the upstream source it
> is recommended to provide a script debian/get-orig-source .
I wonder, maybe uscan could support debian/get-orig-source as a last
Imagine a large red swirl here.