Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> writes: > Hello, > > On Tue 30 Apr 2019 at 08:05AM +02, Ansgar wrote: > > > As an example: to update to a new upstream release, I ideally just > > have to drop the new upstream tarball, update d/changelog and am > > done. > > As a package maintainer, if you don't keep the whole source package in > git, you're giving up on a lot of the power of git.
I can't speak for Ansgar, but “you don't keep the whole source package in Git” is not implied by keeping Debian packaging separate. It's not accurate to the workflow, at least as I described (I don't know Ansgar's case, but nothing he described implies that either). Rather, I keep the Debian packaging source separate from the upstream source. That doesn't preclude Git access to the upstream source, and I frequently use a Git repository cloned from upstream for that. So, the Debian-packaging-in-a-separate-repository does not give up any of the power of Git. > The most significant thing is that you cannot manipulate quilt patches > as commits on a branch. It is also much more involved to cherry pick > commits from upstream branches, and quickly obtain diffs between > Debian's version of the code and arbitrary other branches, to mention > a few other things. The full power of Git is available when I manipulate upstream source to refresh my Debian patches. Indeed, it's even neater to refresh those patches by going straight from the only-upstream-source repository. > I also think that you're doing a disservice to downstream users. If > you're trying to fix a bug in the packaged version of some software on > your computer, you don't care about the distinction between Debian's > packaging scripts and the upstream code. It's all going to be turned > into a .deb once you've fixed your problem. You want the history of > the whole thing. Thus, a git history that contains both the upstream > git history and the Debian maintainer's changes to the packaging > scripts is going to be very useful. A git history of only the Debian > packaging scripts is much less useful. Conversely, I think it does a disservice to downstream users to mix in Debian packaging changes with upstream changes. The separation is useful and much easier to maintain when the repositories are separate. -- \ “Time is the great legalizer, even in the field of morals.” | `\ —Henry L. Mencken | _o__) | Ben Finney
