Initial documentation for building packages

[tsimonq2]

This covers all of the common cases that I can think of.

Let me know if you have any questions/comments/concerns. Feel free to touch it up before merging if what you find is just minor.

Thanks!

[dviererbe]

todo: Use sbuild as the primary tool to build packages and less focus on using debuild.

While using debuild is a valid option to build source and binary packages I would like that we strongly promote sbuild as the primary tool to do so, because it builds from a clean environment.

[rkratky]

todo: Use sbuild as the primary tool to build packages and less focus on using debuild.

How about (as a first measure) we change the order in the article (first sbuild, followed by debuild)?

[dviererbe]

How about (as a first measure) we change the order in the article (first sbuild, followed by debuild)?

I think this may be a reasonable approach. We can expand on sbuild/import advise from the articles featured in the resource section with another PR.

[rkratky]

How about (as a first measure) we change the order in the article (first sbuild, followed by debuild)?

I think this may be a reasonable approach. We can expand on sbuild/import advise from the articles featured in the resource section with another PR.

@dviererbe, thanks, I updated the PR based on the discussion.

@tsimonq2, thank you for the article! I submitted the change in order discussed above, as well as minor fixes in mark-up/formatting.

[dviererbe]

The $ to indicate command line should be avoided.

Other than that it looks good to merge.

[rkratky]

The $ to indicate command line should be avoided.

I realize it's been said in places, but given that we can configure the copy button to ignore the prompt sign, there seems to be no disadvantage to it. Is there any other reason not to have it?

[dviererbe]

The $ to indicate command line should be avoided.

I realize it's been said in places, but given that we can configure the copy button to ignore the prompt sign, there seems to be no disadvantage to it. Is there any other reason not to have it?

To summarize the no-public discussion we just had: Originally I started enforcing this guideline when a Technical Author pointed me to the rule:

DO NOT use prompt marks (e.g. $ or #) in code samples. These cause problems for users who sometimes mistakenly type them in, or who want to copy and paste sections of code. They also encourage poor explanation of the code.

Now I just continue following it to have consistency between the articles. I didn't know until now that the copy button can ignore $ and #, so I also enforced it, so that readers that use the copy button do not need to remove the prompt sign.