This introduces a python dependency to base-files, which I think is incorrect. I think the decision to choose base-files should be reevaluated.
From the point of view of end-users, regardless if the script is in base-files or in its own package, the same number of apt commands will be needed either way.
In its own package it can have its own copyright, manpage, correct dependencies, its own source tarball, tests (which were stripped from the debdiff here), upstream url, nice description, etc.
This introduces a python dependency to base-files, which I think is incorrect. I think the decision to choose base-files should be reevaluated.
From the point of view of end-users, regardless if the script is in base-files or in its own package, the same number of apt commands will be needed either way.
It's either:
apt-get update
apt-get dist-upgrade
ubuntu-advantage enable-esm <token>
or:
apt-get update
apt-get install ubuntu-advantage
ubuntu-advantage enable-esm <token>
In its own package it can have its own copyright, manpage, correct dependencies, its own source tarball, tests (which were stripped from the debdiff here), upstream url, nice description, etc.