Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #12691
| From | Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.python |
| Subject | Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team |
| Date | 2020-06-29 13:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <AmZG1-3Ec-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <AmJrA-2fD-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <AmVVL-1mk-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <AmZG1-3Ec-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On June 29, 2020 10:12:49 AM UTC, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote: >On 6/29/20 8:34 AM, Ondrej Novy wrote: ... >> More over, mock debhelper was upgraded to 13, for no apparent >reason >> (yet another "cosmetic fix" that isn't helping?). I'd like to >remind >> everyone that, increasing debhelper compat version to a number >that >> isn't in stable, without a specific reason (like the need of a >specific >> feature that wasn't there before) is just annoying for anyone >> maintaining backports. That's truth even for when debhelper >itself is >> backported to oldstable (it's always nicer to be able to build a >> backport without requiring another backport at build time). >> >> nope, this is not true. Using the newest debhelper compat level is >> recommended, see man page. There is no reason to __not__ upgrade >> debhelper compat level. I will always upgrade debhelper in my >packages >> to the newest debhelper as soon as possible. Please newer downgrade >> debhelper in my packages again without asking. > >I don't agree this is best practice when backports are to be expected. I'm substantially less enthusiastic about bumping compat levels than Ondrej, but since debhelper 13 is available in buster-backports, backporting is unrelated to whether it's a good idea or not. Scott K
Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2020-06-29 09:00 +0200
Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2020-06-29 13:00 +0200
Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team Scott Talbert <swt@techie.net> - 2020-06-29 16:20 +0200
Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2020-06-29 16:40 +0200
Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team Jean-Philippe MENGUAL <jpmengual@debian.org> - 2020-08-12 19:00 +0200
Re: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2020-06-29 16:50 +0200
Re: pybuild vs os-pkg-tools [was: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team] Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2020-07-07 08:40 +0200
Re: pybuild vs os-pkg-tools [was: Maintaining all of the testing-cabal packages under the OpenStack team] Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2020-07-08 13:10 +0200
csiph-web