on de-supporting deb-make
Vincent Renardias:
> [Bruce:]
> > First, I'd like to see the replacement for deb-make completed, and tested,
> > before we announe the de-support of deb-make. Second, I'd like to see debstd,
> > the run-time component of debmake, supported for a good long time, so that
> > we don't have to re-convert a whole bunch of packages that have been converted
> > only days ago. Surely this is technically feasable.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but which deb-make replacement "being
> completed and tested"? Has the development of a replacement even begun?
I forgot to say this: no, it hasn't. The design hasn't even happened
yet.
Don't worry, the design will happen here where you can see it, and
there is no particular rush atm.
I'm just trying to preempt something of the rush into debmake that
I've been seeing.
In particular, I want to make it clear now that:
* debmake is not in any way required to build Debian packages. It's
not a policy requirement, nor is it technically infeasible to build
them without it.
* I personally would not currently recommend the use of debmake even
without considering its possible future.
* I personally intend to cause debmake to become obsolete, so that
packages using debmake will have to change at some point in the
future. The timescale for packages _having_ to change is unclear.
* In my personal opinion debmake is especially unsuitable for complex
packages with lots of time and effort invested.
Ian.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: