patching upstream -- why not?

[Jörg Sommer]

Hello G.,

G. Milde schrieb am Thu 01. Sep, 10:38 (+0200):
> On 31.08.05, Jörg Sommer wrote:
> > Hello G.,
> > 
> > G. Milde schrieb am Wed 31. Aug, 10:19 (+0200):
> > > On 23.08.05, Jari Aalto wrote:
> 
> > > > Please move 
> > > > 
> > > >     /etc/jed.conf
> > > >     /etc/jed-init.d/
> > > > 
> > > > Under common directory => /etc/<package> like
> > 
> > Why do you think we should not patch upstream files? It's common
> > practice. 
> 
> I gave one reason, (incompatibility with original documentation ...).
> Patches always mean additional work for the packagers and can introduce
> consistency problems, so IMHO they should only be a last resort.

This is not a good reason for me. We only need a patch if the upstream
version do not meet our requirements (aka Debian policy). Maybe there are
some modifications needed that never touch upstream, because they aren't
in his range. And having a systemwide configuration file that takes care
about other packages is truely not of interest of upstream.

> BTW, `locate *.d` showed all *.d/ directories right under /etc/, so
> keeping /etc/jed-init.d/ is also a case of consistency.

The reson for the bug report is that jed has two entries in /etc.

> > John is IMO a person who would see that it works before he do any
> > changes. It's hard to get any changes into JED or SLang, more than ever
> > if they a distribution specific.
> 
> This is true, I doubt that John would like to expand the "config file
> search path" easily (nor would I).
> 
> Still, I think contacting the upstream author should always have
> priority.

I do not agree. If there are problems with the arrangement of the files
in the /Debian package/, I see no reason why we should waste the time
of upstream. It's not a bug nor a feature.

Regards, Jörg.
-- 
Kluge Rede, der nicht Tat folgt, wird dir ohne Früchte darben -
ist wie eine Wunderblume: ohne Duft, nur reich an Farben.
                                          (Gautama Buddha, Dhammapada)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 481 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-jed-devel/attachments/20050904/8e676a2a/attachment.pgp