Aeliton G. Silva > On 18 Nov 2025, at 13:46, Andrey Rakhmatullin <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 01:33:16PM -0300, Aeliton G. Silva wrote: >> Thanks Thomas, This shed some light on what I read at [1](see NOTE >> under "For development releases"), quoting it here: >> >> "NOTE: If the Git repository listed in debian/control's Vcs-Git field >> does not indicate an explicit branch (with the -b <branch> suffix) then >> it should have its HEAD point to the branch where new upstream versions >> are being packaged (that is one of the branches associated to a >> development release)..." >> >> So the complete answer to me > > To what question, again? Your initial email asks about a disrepancy in two > documents, but it, again, doesn't describe what you actually want to know. >
Apologies for not being clear. The question is how to identify which branch should be considered the debianized upstream branch for a given project. >> right now would be: >> 1) The branch stated in debian/control Vcs-Git; or >> 2) If branch not stated, >> 2.1. Check the default branch in salsa; or >> 2.2. use 'git ls-remote --symref <repo> HEAD', as it should be >> pointing to the branch desired branch (as Peter suggested). >> >> Is this the correct understanding? > > Probably, depends on the problem you are solving. > > -- > WBR, wRAR > <signature.asc>
