On Tue, 11 Nov 2014, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> In fact, I was quite non-amused by the initial versions of this idea, but
> reading this latest version, I must say I *like* it. Well done! I am
> especially happy about the way it respects the usual git usage conventions,
> this will ease its adoption a lot.
Thank you! I'm pleased to see that I managed to draft something reasonable.
> It does fail to mention security, and stable-proposed branches. We can just
> leave those to maintainer's discretion, of course.
I believe that those are not really needed in most cases. You rarely have
conflicting updates for -security and -proposed-updates at the same time.
But of course we can say something along this:
--- a/web/deps/dep14.mdwn
+++ b/web/deps/dep14.mdwn
@@ -73,6 +73,14 @@ target distribution. In the case of Debian, that means for
example
"suite" names because those tend to evolve over time ("stable" becomes
"oldstable" and so on).
+Security updates and stable updates are expected to be handled on
+the branch of the associated distribution. For example, in the case of
+Debian, uploads to `wheezy-security` or `wheezy-proposed-updates`
+are prepared on the `debian/wheezy` branch. Shall there be a need to
+manage different versions of the packages in both repositories, then
+the branches `debian/wheezy-security` and `debian/wheezy-updates`
+can be used.
+
The Git repository listed in debian/control's `Vcs-Git` field should
usually have its HEAD point to the branch corresponding to the
distribution where new upstream versions are usually sent. For Debian,
How does that sound ?
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Support Debian LTS: http://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html
Learn to master Debian: http://debian-handbook.info/get/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141112084624.gc27...@home.ouaza.com
