packaging policy

[Reinhard Tartler]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 09:48:41 (CEST), Fabian Greffrath wrote:

> Am 26.04.2010 09:39, schrieb Jonas Smedegaard:
>> I do understand that some find short-form dh7 easier to read than CDBS.
>
> It's just a matter of taste. Before dh7 was introduced I was also in
> favour of CDBS, but the new override_* rules really got me. ;)

Well, IME the time required to understand a piece of code (be it
upstream code or packaging scripts) does have direct influence on the
probability that new contributors start working on the code. I therefore
think that readability and understandability should be an important
criteria for writing packaging scripts.

>> But is that enough reason for making it mandatory for new packages?
>> So the (proposed) plan is to abandon CDBS, but tolerate it temporarily?
>
> I think we shouldn't make anything really mandatory. IMHO it does not
> really help anyone but scares away the members with strong preferences
> for on or the other build system, e.g. Jonas.

I'm also very happy that Jonas does a lot and great work inside
pkg-multimedia, I therefore fully respect his preference and style of
work. It seems that cdbs allows Jonas to be very productive, which is a
great benefit for the packages he is working on. I just hope that his
style of work doesn't mean that no one else but Jonas touches the
package anymore.

> Maybe we should just *recommend* a packaging style but still tolerate
> the others, as they are also perfectly valid to get things done.

I'd also love to see a *recommended* packaging style that every team
member can work with for new packages. If particular, more complex
packages benefit from not following the recommendation, then so be it.

-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4