Deprecating the wiki-based Packaging Guide

[Martin Pitt]

Steve Langasek [2012-12-18 18:40 -0800]:
> A debdiff for a merge of a new upstream package version actually
> *is* useless and is a waste of the sponsoree's time, for the stated
> reason that the "review" of such a debdiff involves re-doing the
> merge myself.

A debdiff between the current Debian and the merged Ubuntu package can
be compared directly to the current Ubuntu delta on MoM, and simply
calling "debdiff" against the current version in Ubuntun gives you the
U-U debdiff. I find neither operation significantly harder than the
two bzr diff commands, and bandwith-wise they are roughly comparable,
too.

So I disagree that they are "useless". What I find useless rather are
trivial merges where Ubuntu's delta is just one line in
debian/control. Doing the merge yourself vs. sponsoring one take the
same time. (They still might be an opportunity to learn for new
contributors).  But if it's a complex merge and the merge actually
went through the effort of cleaning up and upstreaming patches etc., I
appreciate them a lot, and the D-U debdiff is the "distillation" of
that work.

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20121219/99df7a14/attachment.pgp>