On October 12, 2014 2:49:47 AM EDT, Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> wrote: >On 10/10/2014 12:59 PM, Ben Finney wrote: >> Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> writes: >> >>> Changing the number of commits is solving the wrong problem. The >>> problem that needs to be solved is including upstream commits. >That's >>> thoroughly uninteresting for a packaging team. >> >> Agreed. This is a direct result of rebasing Debian packaging history >> onto upstream VCS history, and keeping them all in the same repo as >one >> undifferentiated history, no? > >The IRC bot and the commit-by-email function, while being nice, aren't >going to be the decision making features. What's going to be is what is >the most convenient for doing the packaging work. > >> It's a good illustration of why I much prefer the workflow of a >separate >> VCS for the ‘debian/’ directory, merged with upstream source only at >> build time. The results of the merge are in a separate location and >are >> never checked into VCS, they're used only for the build. >> >> See ‘git-buildpackage(1)’ for the ‘--git-overlay’ option, which AFAIK >> does this. >> >> That way, the history of the Debian packaging VCS is entirely about >> what happened to Debian packaging; upstream VCS history is elsewhere. >> That seems to address the trouble entirely. > >There are perfectly valid points for using what you describe above. But >also, there's some other reasons why it's preferable to have upstream >source within the VCS packaging branches. > >During Debconf 14, we had this discussion. Only Paultag wanted this, >everyone else didn't. Let's say there's a few more other people which >were not accounted for and that were not at Debconf, those who prefers >having upstream source code in the VCS are still the majority. > >Please, let's move on and not discuss it again... > >Also, during the Debconf discussion, we decided we would use the >pristine-tar workflow, *not* using upstream VCS merge. A >"git-import-orig" normally goes into a single commit, which I don't >think would bother anyone (not on the list, or on IRC). While I don't >agree with this decision, I prefer to just import upstream VCS and do >packaging based on tags, but I will still respect it when packaging in >the DPMT. Anyone who doesn't respect what we are collectively agree on >should IMO take the blame for what happened on IRC and on the commit >list, and pointing fingers at whoever configured it is IMO wrong.
It's my fault someone else configured their git repos so IRC and the ML get flooded? Nonsense. I don't know who caused it to happen, but that's definitely where I'm (correctly) pointing fingers. Scott K -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/a7633e1a-c4d2-4ae0-a3ab-4d6b9b2c5...@kitterman.com
