On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 04:15:13PM +0200, Fabio Fantoni wrote: > Il 04/08/2024 15:36, Andrey Rakhmatullin ha scritto: > > On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 04:15:33PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > > one problem I have with NMUs in team-maintained package is that they > > > often bypass Salsa… Would it make sense to add to the DEP a request > > > that NMUs are started from and pushed to the default branch? > > Only if DEP-18 also includes an easy way to find the workflow used by the > > repo, which I'm not seeing there (which may be my fault). > > > something like wrote here can help for you? > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/08/msg00058.html > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/08/msg00062.html > > I think something like this could be useful, even in a possible future where > all packages would use git and salsa; but from the answers received so far > it seems to be considered a useless thing. I would be curious to know the > opinion of more people.
It's similar but different: I'm talking about workflows to build a package from the repo (e.g. "gbp with gbp-pq and importing upstream tarballs"). And yeah it could be a metadata field. -- WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
