[sword-devel] New public git mirror of Sword SVN trunk and why

[Dmitrijs Ledkovs]

On 18 December 2012 13:28, Matěj Cepl <mcepl at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 18/12/12 01:10, Greg Hellings wrote:
>> were mentioned (but Linux packagers will absolute forbid that); once
>
> That's just plainly not true if that should read "all Linux packagers"
> ... see for example
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
> (I don't know Debian policy enough anymore, so I cannot point you to the
> URL). The world is just not so neat anymore, so large distribution
> couldn't survive insisting on having only releases with nice tags.
>

Debian policy does support for snapshot packaging, where & when appropriate
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#s3.2.1

But stable & longer-term supported release are more appropriate for
Debian as a rule of thumb.

> Yes, many packagers (me included) hugely prefer having released
> tarballs, but it does not mean there is no way at all.
>

But I package stable releases + selective patches. Which goes both
ways. I had to disable binding for wheezy release, due to FTBFS with
new gcc & no patches available to resolve the issue. Now wheezy is
frozen, and new features are not accepted. Oh well, bindings didn't
make it into previous release & will not make it into the current one
either.


> Also, yes, it is hugely preferable to have as few as possible patches in
> the distribution packages, but it is not like the end of the world if
> there are some. Especially patch which resolves FTBFS on the particular
> platform is quite common.
>