Hi, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> wrote: > Hello, > > Here are some answers. Feel free to (re)organize them in a wiki page > under the DebianInstaller namespace. :)
If have documented the l10n-uploading procedere on the wiki, to be found at https://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Uploading Holger > Holger Wansing <hwans...@mailbox.org> (2018-08-10): > > Yes, and I didn't read anything about that in the several > > packaging/uploading docu. So that's mostly best practice, but no > > strict packaging rule or the like? > > > > Also, I don't know anything about tagging. So, I need to know > > something more about this tagging: > > > > When do we use it? > > Just for every new uploaded version, as it seems... > > More circumstances, where to set tags? > > I think most if not all packaging teams create tags when they upload a > given revision of a source package; this even existed prior to git! :) > > This makes it possible to identify what revision of source code was > (probably, no absolute guarantee) used to create a given package, > which limits the need for downloading entire history of source > packages using debsnap and friends. > > > Which tags do we use? The lightweighted or the annotated ones? > > Looking at the existing tags, it seems that's annotated ones, but > > without GPG signatur. Right? > > I tend to use this when releasing: > > git commit -am 'releasing version $copied_from_changelog' > git tag -sm 'tagging version $copied_from_changelog' > $copied_possibly_adapted_from_changelog > > If you don't have a GPG key handy (but then how would you debsign your > upload?), you might want to use “git tag -am” instead of “git tag -sm”, > which indeed creates an annotated tag, which still contains meta data > like the tagger, a message, etc.; except for the GPG signature part. > > Interesting points: > - you can mention the real/complete version in there; > - you can verifiy the GPG signature if you ever doubt the repository > (remember we have rather broad access with many many users on > alioth first and on salsa now); > - “git describe” doesn't use lightweight tags by default, one needs > to pass “--tags”, so annotated/signed tags are better for that as > well. > > What about those versions? > - $copied_from_changelog: hopefully self-explanatory :) > - $copied_possibly_adapted_from_changelog: there are special > characters that can be used in Debian version numbers, but cannot > be used directly in git (like ':' and '~'), so we have to adjust > for those. > > Examples for ':' include apt-setup, busybox, tzsetup; depending on the > habits of the person who uploads them, the epoch part (N:) is > sometimes removed entirely (there can be a single version in the > Debian archive of a given package, regardless of the epoch part, > anyway). Usual replacement character is '%'. > > Examples for '~' include all packages we backport using the usual > scheme: $unstable_version~deb9u1. Usual replacement character is '_'. > > People might use git-buildpackage which has some tagging options, > but I tend to find the command line overly long, and it prefixes > tags with a debian/ string, which we doesn't really make sense in a > d-i context since most packages are Debian-specific anyway. We could > arguable ship a configuration file in all packages, but I'm not sure > we need more administrativia… > > Maybe we should just have a tagging script in the scripts/ directory? > I used to use “xsf-tag” in the X Strike Force: > https://salsa.debian.org/xorg-team/debian/xsf-tools/blob/master/xsf-tag > > What do you think? > > > Cheers, > -- > Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> > D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant -- ============================================================ Created with Sylpheed 3.5.1 under D E B I A N L I N U X 9 " S T R E T C H " . Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/ ============================================================
