[Debian-med-packaging] debian/upstream vs. debian/upstream/signing-key.pgp

[Andreas Tille]

On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:52:03AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:05:28PM +0100, Jan Beyer a écrit :
> > 
> > thanks for your reply. But I'm not quite convinced that you are right,
> > because both the recent changelog entry of devscripts and the man page of
> > uscan talk explicitly about debian/upstream/signing-key.[asc,gpg]...
> 
> Hello everybody,
> 
> this is discussed in #736760, and we need to decide whether devscripts cancel
> their changes, or somebody organises a transition, or the DEP 12 project is
> cancelled.

While I perfectly agree that it would have been the correct way to
discuss claiming parts of the namespace first (heck, even if you do
discuss changes for uscan at length like I did for Files-Excluded people
raise their hands afterwards that should be implemented differently) I
would volunteer to *help* (not lead) in a transition which means

  * reuploading files of Debian Med (and if needed of Debian Science
    and DebiChem)
  * working on the needed changes for UDD machine readable files gatherer

However, my prefered solution for this problem would to start an open
discussion on debian-devel for opinions about a potential new name for
the signature file.  This would have two advantages:

  1. We might find some better consensus which could make a stressfull
     transition superfluous
  2. Readers of the list would hopefully *learn* about both things
     (the signature file as well as the metadata file)

>From my point of view the later is perhaps even more important.

BTW, I would be quite happy if the work on upstream metadata which had
been done in a quite big effort would be respected to some extend and
not simply spoiled due to some naming choice.

Kind regards

       Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de