> I didn't yet get what is the upside of moving things is and what the > proposals for
If we can agree to have the description of upstreams in this one file, we can avoid duplicating the same configuration of for git-buildpackage and uscan in two different places. The latest uscan has started to read debian/upstream/metadata if there is no debian/watch, and is likely to rely to on that file for signature and tag checks in the future if it was possible, meaning if Jelmer agrees to extend DEP-12 to have new fields in the upstream file and you agree that a future version of gbp could read the values from there if they are missing from gbp.conf. Sure, there is no gain immediately for git-buildpackage but there is a gain in standardizing gbp practices so all tools doing similar things can have a single source of truth describing what the upstream is like.
