Hello

Thanks for clarifying your point.

Note that I had quickly tested dh_make in a near-empty directory before
posting, and the only question I got asked was the type of the package
(library, many libraries, program, etc). But I’ve just realized that I
have two dh_make-related variables set in my environment, plus maybe
config files, so a typical user may have more questions to answer, which
is annoying if the setup.cfg¹ already has them. And to be honest, the
question about the type of the package is not simple if you’re not
fluent with the Policy, so if Distutils2 can answer that thanks to its
knowledge, all the better. I therefore agree with you :)

One thing I’m attached to: The name of the command should respect
existing conventions. Entirely new concepts get dedicated names (e.g.
“check” and “test”), but commands fitting in the areas of sdist or bdist
should say so in their name. How about sdist_debian?

It may be useful to precise something at this point: You may read about
both “debian” and “Debian” packages. “debian” or “.deb” or “debs” are
binary distributions that use the file formats defined by Debian,
whereas “Debian” packages are binary distributions that use these
formats, conform to the Debian policy, are tested on lintian.debian.org
and piuparts.debian.org, and most importantly, are scrutinized for
Debian Free Software Guidelines compliance. That’s why I, for one, never
uses third-party deb packages or apt repos: If it’s going to be
installed system-wide, I want a verified Debian package.

HTH

¹ Not a typo, just an anticipation of PEP 390 ;)

Kind regards