Much of that an maintainers will only deal with source
A project maintainer could deal with this by providing only source, supporting only systemd, and simply advising anyone building debian packages to mark them in DEBIAN/control as depending on systemd. Alternately, if the mantainer is a Debian user, they could publish the debian packages from their own repo done their way, no need to abandon it.
There are plenty of packages in my Ubuntu-based systems that don't come from official repos. Kdenlive, MLT, Mesa, and the kernel are all from PPA's, 15 are my own debs made from builds of ffmpeg from source (needed for Kdenlive to work right with AVCHD files!), one is a repackaged and modified version of Debian's dracut package, and ten are my own programs outright.
Debian is free software and so are its downstream derivatives like Ubuntu and it's derivatives like Mint. Packaging policies only affect those trying to get into a distro's official or "community supported" default repos. They don't deem themselves to have the authority to prevent users from installing other packages.
Originally posted by valeriodean
View Post
There are plenty of packages in my Ubuntu-based systems that don't come from official repos. Kdenlive, MLT, Mesa, and the kernel are all from PPA's, 15 are my own debs made from builds of ffmpeg from source (needed for Kdenlive to work right with AVCHD files!), one is a repackaged and modified version of Debian's dracut package, and ten are my own programs outright.
Debian is free software and so are its downstream derivatives like Ubuntu and it's derivatives like Mint. Packaging policies only affect those trying to get into a distro's official or "community supported" default repos. They don't deem themselves to have the authority to prevent users from installing other packages.
Comment