Re: Do we still need pristine-tar?

Hi Andreas,

On 2025-09-16 22:53, Andreas Tille wrote:
> If you tar up some directory its not granted that if some other user is
> doing the same at some different time the tarball is byte identical.
> Only after unpackaging the two tarballs the unpackaged trees are byte
> identical again.  Storing the pristine-tar information solves this
> problem (to 99,99% - there are always people who say its not working but
> was never the case for me).
> 
> I've read the discussion with interest and I admit I feel better when
> having some orig.tar.gz that is identical with what can be found
> upstream and in the vast majority of cases we do not do any repackaging.
> 
> Its hard to accomplish this if more than one developer is contributing
> to the packaging of the new upstream version when not using
> pristine-tar.  I'm happy to see tag2upload to gain traktion.  However,
> loosing pristine-tar features just because tag2upload does not support
> it seems unfortunate to me.

Glad to hear we share the same sentiment regarding the preservation of 
pristine upstream contents. To me the lack of pristine-tar features in 
tag2upload is a blocking drawback. Also I would be unhappy about team 
mates skipping pristine-tar for updates of my packages.

Best wishes,
Andrius