Skip to content

Apparent requirement of debian/watch without alternatives is misleading #328

@CarlosNihelton

Description

@CarlosNihelton

Hi folks! Thanks for improving this documentation set.

I'm working through an MIR of a package which does not have a debian/watch file, but instead it relies on debian/upstream/metadata, which git-buildpackage reads and learns from it on how to fetch new upstream releases, completely replacing uscan and the need for debian/watch (see DEP-12 for more information). Yet, the MIR template implies that debian/watch is the only automation available and offers as fallback a README.source with manual steps for the simple-enough cases.

Here's the snippet in the mir-reporters-template that I'm talking about:
https://github.com/ubuntu/ubuntu-project-docs/blob/main/docs/MIR/mir-reporters-template.md?plain=1#L271-L278

We should acknowledge that for packages maintained with git-buildpackage a debian/upstream/metadata is expected, and debian/watch as a fallback.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions