]] Thomas Goirand > 1- Mandating VcsGit and VcsBrowser, meaning we do mandate using Git for > packaging.
Like Steve said, there are cases where git is not the right tool. Recommending, fine. Mandating? No, I think that would be a bad idea. > 2- Mandating using the "gbp patches unapplied" layout for Git, as this > seems to be the most popular layout, and that we need some kind of > consistency. It seems to be self-evident to you that we need consistency. It's not at all clear to me that having a single layout to rule them all is the right path forward. Why do you think we should just have a single layout? Beyond that, I think we should move away from patches-unapplied rather than towards it. If you look at how normal software development is done today, it's done with a git repo and not shuffling patches-as-files back and forth. I also think that having a single way of solving a problem will keep us back from further evolution. Freedom to experiment is useful, and by having this as a GR, the only way forward from this would be to have another GR to change to something else. Binding ourselves that way doesn't seem wise. As for what you wrote downthread about possible to use 1.0 native packages: yes, > 3- Mandating using Salsa as a Git repository. Again I think this proposal fails to account for corner cases, as an example on top of what other have talked about: this could end up affecting what can go into non-free. This would also increase coupling, something we already have a problem with, and which is considered a bad idea in software development. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
