Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:40:39 +0200
- From: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:18:48AM +0200, Gard Spreemann wrote:
> For one of my packages, I maintain two public git branches: one is
> upstream/latest, where I've been importing upstream's released tarballs,
> and the other is debian/sid that contains the packaging.
> Recently, upstream has finally started using git. What is the
> recommended way for me to maintain a sane branch structure for the
> packaging repository while starting to use upstream's git master as the
> upstream branch to follow?
> (My first thought is to track upstream's master as upstream/latest-git
> or something, and start merging from that into debian/sid, but I don't
> know if there's a better way.)
Naming doesn't really matter -- automated tools know only about the
packaging branch, and that's specified in the Vcs-Git field.
So it's mostly about workflow. Here the opinions differ greatly, and it's a
fine area for flamewars. There are those who swear by gbp, while for me
that's a monstrosity -- my personal preference is raw git, where updating to
a new upstream is "git merge v3.14.15", with all git goodness like
cherry-pick or bisect working unmolested. But workflow choices are many.
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Did ya know that typing "test -j8" instead of "ctest -j8"
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ will make your testsuite pass much faster, and fix bugs?