Dear maintainer,

This package is among the few (1.9%) that still use source format 1.0 in
bookworm.  Please upgrade it to source format 3.0, as (1) this format has many
advantages, as documented in https://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0 ; (2)
this contributes to standardization of packaging practices.

Please note that this is also a sign that the packaging of this software
could maybe benefit from a refresh. It might be a good opportunity to
look at other aspects as well.

This package is a native package, so the likely target is 3.0 (native), not
3.0 (quilt).


This mass bug filing was discussed on debian-devel@:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2022/03/msg00074.html

Thanks

Lucas

Hi Matthew,

I keep bug #1007297 in CC since this is rather relevant in this
bug report.

Am Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 09:44:24AM +0000 schrieb Matthew Vernon:

I *personally* think this argument does not apply to 3.0 (native) since
you will not apply patches to native packages but IMHO some random bug
in BTS is the wrong place to discuss this.

My main point was the migration to Salsa.  Even if I disagree about the
source format I perfectly accept it since you are the maintainer of this
package and I do not intend to question this.  If you want to upload
yourself or want me to upload with the following change:


diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index e0ae4bd..3b9cc64 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -2,8 +2,7 @@ debroster (1.19) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium

   * Team upload.
   * Maintain package on Salsa
-  * Source format 3.0 (native)
-    Closes: #1007297
+  * Maintainer prefers source format 1.0
   * Standards-Version: 4.7.0 (routine-update)
   * debhelper-compat 13 (routine-update)
   * Reorder sequence of d/control fields by cme (routine-update)
diff --git a/debian/source/format b/debian/source/format
index 89ae9db..d3827e7 100644
--- a/debian/source/format
+++ b/debian/source/format
@@ -1 +1 @@
-3.0 (native)
+1.0


my main point (maintenance on Salsa) is solved.  In any case I'd
recommend adding some tags that fit to bug #1007297 to inform others
about your opinion.  I've seen NMUs "fixing" the source format only.

Thank you for your quick response in any case
    Andreas.

Hi,

Ack, and yes I should wontfix the other bug or similar.

Hm, you've lost my git history (which OK, I hadn't published, but I'd
still like to keep). Can we try and produce a branch which contains my
history and your changes?

Regards,

Matthew

Hi Matthew,

Am Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 02:02:18PM +0000 schrieb Matthew Vernon:

Sounds good.

You might like to publish your Git history somewhere and I'd volunteer
to apply my changes on top of it.  The main point of my effort to move
to Salsa what is not yet there is to make sure Git history is not lost.
So I'd happily care for this if you publish your repository somewhere.
As long as a package does not have any Vcs fields set the best guess is
what `gbp import-dscs` can create - but I love to do better.

Kind regards
   Andreas.

Hi,

OK, I've pushed my dgit/sid branch to salsa - it contains my
reconstruction of my older versions, your changes, and a couple of other
fixes on top of them. I've built a 1.19 on the basis of the tip of that
branch.

If you're OK with this, I propose to make dgit/sid the default branch
for the repo (and remove your master branch), and do an upload on that
basis.

Seem good?

Regards,

Matthew

Hi,
 > > Perfect.  I'm happy we talked about this. :-)

Now done. Thanks for all the packaging work you did here, and your
patience :)

Regards,

Matthew

Hi Matthew,

Am Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 04:49:39PM +0000 schrieb Matthew Vernon:

Cool.

Perfect.  I'm happy we talked about this. :-)

Kind regards
    Andreas.

Hi Matthew,

Am Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 05:20:22PM +0000 schrieb Matthew Vernon:

Great.

You are welcome
   Andreas.