Hi Desmond! On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 01:18 +0800, Desmond O. Chang wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 05:13, Luca Capello <l...@pca.it> wrote: > > BTW, these are not complaints, I actually want to understand why you > > half-switched to source-format-3.0(quilt) ;-) > > Since I simply use 'pdebuild' without any options of pdebuild itself > and dpkg (they are too long and complex), I have to change the source > format to 3.0(quilt) so that dpkg-source will not put .git/* into the > original tarball.
Strange, AFAIK dpkg-source (called by dpkg-buildpackage, called by pdebuild) should already exclude .git/ when called with the -i option, maybe were you not aware of that? Anyway, you should actually use git-buildpackage or, better, the new git-pbuilder script by Russ Allbery <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2010-08/002.html>. A minimal ~/.gbp.conf to use git-buildpackage with pbuilder is: ===== [DEFAULT] builder = pdebuild ===== FTR, I do not use it git-pbuilder myself, since I have custom scripts and have not had the time to investigate it, yet. However, it is always a good thing to use "upstream" tools, given that they are usually up-to-date WTR the Debian requirements (Policy, etc.). > My original purpose is that I plan to upgrade the patches in the next > versions so that I can release a new version as soon as possible. Ah, OK. Anyway, I completed the migration to source-format-3.0(quilt): http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-common-lisp/stumpwm.git;a=commitdiff;h=9ff0c7448463d910d3a7ffa929ed832fd2eb82b6 > > Sure, while doing it directly from the Git repository I indirectly found > > a problem with debcheckout <http://bugs.debian.org/592660> :-( It was a problem of our Git repository, fixed. > > Doing that, I set the distribution to "UNRELEASED" to avoid any faulty > > upload to Debian (dput will wine if you try to upload a package with > > that distribution) and also unfinalized the debian/changelog entry. > > This last point is still controversial, given that there are different > > workflows <http://bugs.debian.org/517973>. However, my point in this > > being that I would prefer you to finalize the package. > > OK, It will be finalized after our discussing. Please check if everything is OK (package building and lintian cleanness) and then finalize it :-) > > Given the quality of your work on StumpWM (I have not checked the other > > packages you maintain, sorry) and your responsiveness, reading the > > Debian packaging documentation (Policy, Developer Reference & Co.) > > should not be too difficult, right? Feel free to ask for any question > > you have, a better list would be debian-mentors@, but if your questions > > are Common Lisp-specific, this list is fine as well. > > > > Thank you for stepping in taking care of Common Lisp in Debian. > > I have read the social contract, DFSG and DMUP. Can I apply now? Please read the full story at <http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMaintainer>, unfortunately one of the requirements is to have your OpenPGP key signed by at least one Debian Developer, I completely forgot it, sorry. Look at <http://wiki.debian.org/Keysigning/Offers> to find someone near you. In the meantime, I will be happy to sponsor your packages, or at least StumpWM ;-) Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ pkg-common-lisp-devel mailing list pkg-common-lisp-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-common-lisp-devel
