Hello Otto, On Fri 22 Nov 2024 at 09:33pm -08, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>> Most packages I've seen so far use a single 'upstream' branch (rather >> than 'upstream/*') and gbp handles this gracefully even with multiple >> upstream branches. >> >> DEP-14 is till "candidate", so I'm not sure it's worth following this >> when most of the repos we fork/merge don't follow this either. > > I'd say most repos do follow it, and that DEP-14 is de-facto what all > tools are unifying on. Mass converting old repos is one thing (and > might never be done), but it would make sense to have all process > documentation follow DEP-14 for all future work, right? I think you might be generalising too much from your own experience here. For example, in my own work, I rarely encounter a DEP-14-compliant repository, except for debian/* tags. Without getting into details on this list, which would be out-of-place, it is also not really clear that DEP-14 adds much value (again, except for debian/* tags). So it is not too surprising that people don't use it. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
