* Michael Tremer michael.tremer@ipfire.org [2022-07-08 11:13]:
I didn’t rebuild the packages, yet, as there is probably no need.
It would be great to provide new packages at some point to ease the transition to the new package names but there is still time. Once users of the ipfire packages upgrade to the new version (which should work seamlessly), updates to the Debian version will be no problem as well.
I don’t really want to provide packages for unstable and bookworm then, because should use the “official” packages.
But I do want to be absolutely compatible with unstable. See below...
What do you mean by "absolutely compatible"? The package names and content are the same and Debian tooling will take care that the packages are compatible with the other packages in unstable.
I've uploaded first versions here:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libloc https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libloc-database
Note that these target Debian unstable and will probably not build on older Debian versions. Testing and comments welcome.
And that is the problem then…
The comment was for the Debian source package not software using the library later. I don't see a problem here.
Would it be a good idea to merge all your changes into our Git repository?
No, as commented above that would not work when building the package for older Debian versions. You could probably use debhelper from buster-backports to build them if you want.
Is it long term a good idea to keep debian/ in our repository?
Debian encourage upstream not to provide a debian/ directory but our tooling filters them anyhow so it is not important.
In theory that could go as soon as bookworm becomes stable.
Currently you provide packages for buster and bullseye, I guess you want to keep those.
Cheers Jochen