On January 29, 2017 2:17:16 AM EST, Arto Jantunen <vi...@debian.org> wrote: >Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> writes: > >> On Sunday, January 29, 2017 09:39:10 AM Brian May wrote: >>> Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> writes: >>> > On Sunday, January 29, 2017 08:54:57 AM Brian May wrote: >>> >> Can we switch away from git-dpm yet? Sure this is most likely >user >>> >> error, however I want to try to solve an RC bug, not fix broken >git-dpm >>> >> first. >>> > >>> > Much like the switch from svn to git, I think we need an agreed >new >>> > workflow and tools and a migration plan. >>> > >>> > What do you propose? >>> >>> I would think "gbp pq" is the most popular. >>> >>> I think something like: >>> >>> * Don't touch existing packages just for the sake of doing so. >>> * Next time you do need to update a package with a debian/.git-dpm: >>> 1. Delete debian/.git-dpm. >>> 2. Unapply all patches and commit (not sure what the easiest way >is) >>> 3. Update debian/source/options with "unapply-patches" (anything >else?). >>> * If you encounter a package without debian/.git-dpm, don't re-add >it. >>> * Don't push the gbp pq patches queue branch. >> >> I've never used it. >> >> Does that then result in one big undifferentiated mass of diff in the >source >> package? > >No, it results in separate patches with their headers intact in the >source package. I assume git-dpm (which I've never used) produces the >same end result. > >The git repository is of course different, with gbp pq carrying the >patches as patches in the packaging branch, and git-dpm having separate >magical patch branches.
OK. Where do I find documentation to give this a try? Scott K
