On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:41 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Friday, January 06, 2017 12:29:54 AM IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > > On 01/04/2017 05:42 AM, Colin Watson wrote: > > > git-dpm does too, and I agree it's nice. > > > > here's an opposite data point: > > > > being forced to use git-dpm by the python-modules-team policy - i > > haven't had a single joyful experience with git-dpm. > > so far, every import of a new upstream release turned into a nightmare > > with an extra working clone of the repository, and skimming through the > > same man- and webpages full of outdated documentation even though i'm > > pretty sure that the required information was there the last time i looked. > > > > git-dpm might be useful if you use it daily. > > as it stands, i'm a very happy gbp user (without fancy addons) for > > almost all of my packages, and the few python modules i maintain don't > > do releases that often (which explains why i don't get a routine for > > doing new upstream imports with git-dpm). > > I don't use it often enough to remember all the details either. I don't > recall the last time I had to do more than copy/paste a command from the man > page (OK, git-dpm tag I can remember).
Besides, git-dpm usually tells you what command to run next, like: git-dpm import-new-upstream -> git-dpm rebase-patched -> git-dpm update-patches It did not take me much time to adapt to the git-dpm workflow as a result. I should say that I have been a happy git-dpm user so far. Ghis
