packaging policy

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 04:45:43PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:

>We could either recommend dh7 or document the packaging patterns 
>described below by Jonas.


>> What I would find the most helpful was to document main patterns of 
>> our actual packaging work: This would serve both as technical 
>> introductions for beginners and as social hinting for more 
>> experienced developers (we do want to attract both, right?).
>>
>> Examples:
>>
>>    * we do code review, so please commit in sensible chunks
>>    * most of us use short-form dh7, some use CDBS
>>    * we use git-buildpackage with separate DEP3-hinted patches
>>
>> With the above, I bet new contributors would choose short-form dh7 
>> unless already decided on CDBS, simply because we clearly describe 
>> how likely it is to get help using either style.  Similarly a 
>> newcomer would probably think twice before insisting on using e.g. 
>> Darcs since that would be alien to the team (no matter if some in the 
>> team use Darcs in some other contexts).
>
>That's the least enforcing method. This list comes to my mind:
>
>      * we do code review, so please commit in sensible chunks
>      * most of us use short-form dh7, some use CDBS
>      * we use git as version control system
>      * we use separate DEP3-hinted patches

Yes, better to separate those last, separate issues (I do tend to write 
very compact - thanks for loosening up!).


>How to describe the 3.0 source migration?

It is my impression that we have not yet fully decided on that.  So 
perhaps simply state our current uncertainty:

   * Some packages use source format 3.0 (quilt) despite quirks with git, 
     some explicitly use format 1.0, but most do not yet use either

...which triggers another idea: Let's talk about patterns of _packages_ 
rather than us developers, as we do (ideally) work on them as a team, 
right? ;-)


>Do we recommend DEP-5?

Personally I find it really great.  Anyone not liking it, please speak 
up - not so as to discuss it now (I suggest), but rather so as to 
correctly document that we represent multiple opinions on this issue.


>Do we wrap lists in debian/control (for example, Build-Depends)?

It is new to me - I had seen it before but you guys made me reflect on 
it and have now made CDBS do it by default.  In other words: I love it!

I do not like long indentations, though.  I propose that we recommend 
wrapping with comma+newline+one-single-space.


  - Jonas

-- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20100426/84214606/attachment.pgp>