Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #17219

Re: Guidence on package development

Path	csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	Re: Guidence on package development
Date	Wed, 03 Dec 2025 21:20:01 +0100
Message-ID	<LY1up-900-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<LY0I1-8rN-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <LY1b3-8Cm-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <LY1up-900-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed Dec 3 20:14:16 2025
Old-Return-Path	<wrar@debian.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-11.998 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight	using cached result; rate: -3.5
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8y6dcWJ8MZMufvtv"
Content-Disposition	inline
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/23452
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/aTCaBwZ1FfvmVKkV@belkar.wrar.name
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	47
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date	Thu, 4 Dec 2025 01:13:59 +0500
X-Original-Message-ID	<aTCaBwZ1FfvmVKkV@belkar.wrar.name>
X-Original-References	<c0d757009ef06d9db0311baa47312c40ed693557.camel@gmail.com> <aTCV4oeGfm_CWWeY@belkar.wrar.name> <CAJcuXAB=unK7cSw=CWtauG6==yRzpZRDs=9tbrD8Hmg5BNX=6g@mail.gmail.com>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:17219

Show key headers only | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 01:40:27AM +0530, Jai kadam wrote:
>Thanks for the clarification, but this thing is really scratching my mind
>why are we making chages in a already debinized repo?

Because your task, at the highest abstraction level, is to move the 
packaging on top of the new upstream version, adapting it in the process 
if needed. 

>If a version 2 of a
>package is in upstream why would someone patch the already debinized repo
>instead of patching the new upstream and debianzing it ?

It's possible that your definitions of "patch", "debianize" and "make 
changes" are different from the usual ones, or maybe that you are 
misunderstanding some basic parts of the workflows involved.

-- 
WBR, wRAR

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Guidence on package development jvk <jaivkadam@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 20:30 +0100
  Re: Guidence on package development Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-12-03 21:00 +0100
    Re: Guidence on package development Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 21:20 +0100
    Re: Guidence on package development Jai kadam <jaivkadam@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 21:20 +0100
      Re: Guidence on package development Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-12-03 21:20 +0100
      Re: Guidence on package development Joost van Baal-Ilić <joostvb-debian@mdcc.cx> - 2025-12-04 12:10 +0100

csiph-web