This page is a discution place for the choices of the tools used in the Debian Games Team

Please add your answers, reasons and name for each question

Should we use debhelper? Why? Any exceptions? Did you used it before (which package)?

EddyPetrisor

Yes. Ubiquity, largely accepted, does the right thing. No. Yes (oolite, aspell-ro - unofficial).

MiriamRuiz

Yes, I think Debhelper is so commonly used that most of the maintainers know how to handle it. It provides so many pros that I'm totally for it.

Should we use cdbs? Why? Any exceptions? Did you used it before?

Gonéri Le Bouder

I tried to use CDBS on some packages from the SVN. For me the major issues are:

I agree with a "no cdbs" rule in the team. In this case i've to clean up ri-li and libenet.

EddyPetrisor

I always admired the speed of package creation in Gentoo. The main reason behind the success and speed is the fact they use rules for classes of applications (gtk building rules, qt building rules, autotoolized building rules, etc.) and inheritance. This way they can reduce the amount of work needed per package if it can be included in a more generic class, which can happen most times, and they diverge only as much as needed. CDBS tries to do the same thing for debian packages. Thus I say we should give it a try for a couple of packages.

I never used cdbs before.

MiriamRuiz

I've never used it. The problems I find with it are mainly:

I'd prefer to avoid its usage.

StefanPotyra

Used it once for a python module, but I neither like it very much, nor have I very good knowledge about it.

Should we use dpatch? Why? Any exceptions? Did you used it before?

EddyPetrisor

Yes, where the full source is not in SVN, but only the debian directory. Dpatch fits when only the debian specific part is kept in SVN because there is no ghost (only bits and pieces where needed) copy of the modifications. Should not be used where full source is in SVN. I used it in glest and other packages which I modified which were already using dpatch.

MiriamRuiz

I've used it before. I think using a patching system makes it a bit more confusing to analyze and the package, but it makes the packaging system more compact so only the debian/ directory would have to be uploaded. If we decided to use it, we should write some basic guidelines on how to make and handle the patches.

Gonéri Le Bouder

dpatch is the worst patch managing system after plain source.

Should we use quilt? Why? Any exceptions? Did you used it before?

EddyPetrisor

I heard is a better solution than dpatch when many patches are used in a package. I don't have any strong feelings either way, but I never used it.

Gonéri Le Bouder

Currently I use simple-patchsys.mk and i'm going to switch to quilt. I'm ok for a "quilt only" rule.

MiriamRuiz

I've never used quilt but I heard very nice things about it. If we decided for a patching system, I think we should use only one of them, and probably quilt is better than dpatch.

Should we use plain diff.gz files? Why? Any exceptions?

MiriamRuiz

As SVN handles the incremental differences in the uploads, it seems to make unneccesary the usage of a patch system, so modifying plain upstream files might be an option.

StefanPotyra

I second Miry. I just don't see much benefits of a patch system since we already use svn.

Gonéri Le Bouder

IMO, a source package must be readable out of the box. I like to have an overview of the change that the packager did by looking in the debian/patches directory. With quilt this can by done without a lot of pains.

Conclusions

Will be filled later