Re: git vs dfsg tarballs
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 12:18:24 +0000
- From: Wookey <wookey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: git vs dfsg tarballs
On 2018-12-07 12:48 +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 21.11.18 04:22, Paul Wise wrote: > > Actually, since about a decade, I'm not doing any code changes outside > git, and I'm building packages only directly from git. Frankly, I don't > see any reason why that can't be the standard case. Just because you like a tool doesn't mean everyone does. I know I understand patches and tarballs much better than I understand git, so I prefer to use the former. To answer your original question about DFSG differences, the difference between upstream and the DFSG is normally defined by 'Files-Excluded' in the copyright file and compression/name transformations in the watch file. It is for my packages, anyway. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM http://wookware.org/
Description: PGP signature
- Prev by Date: Re: Would be possible to have a ".treeinfo" file added to the installers' page?
- Next by Date: Re: Would be possible to have a ".treeinfo" file added to the installers' page?
- Previous by thread: Re: git vs dfsg tarballs
- Next by thread: Re: git vs dfsg tarballs