Re: Survey: git packaging practices / repository format
Hi. Thanks for your contributions which I am trying to capture, but I
don't think I fully understand them.
David Bremner writes ("Re: Survey: git packaging practices / repository format"):
> With modified upstream files in the main branch, plus debian/*, but
> usually no d/patches I use a seperate (manually
> rebased) branch for patches, and export those at dsc creation time using
> a gitpkg hook
Is this the same setup as described by Simon McVittie for xorg
packages (eg, mesa) ?
If not I don't understand, because you say both that the upstream
files are modified in your main branch, and that there are patches in
d/patches but that is in a separate branch. Are the same changes
represented twice, then, on two git branches ?
You say "a gitpkg hook". Is the hook script in Debian or is it ad
hoc ? My table would perhaps want to name it.
> With unmodified upstream files in the main branch, plus debian/*, but
> usually no d/patches, I use git-debcherry to generate a quilt series at
> dsc build time.
I think I understand this one a bit better than the one above.
What constraints are there on the main branch, for this to work ?
 git-debcherry solves a very similar problem to dgit's quilt
linearisation, which is used for example by dgit to construct `3.0
(quilt)' patches out of the commits made by an NMUer.
And I think git-debrebase branches are always suitable for use with
git-debcherry, but git-debrebase knows how to make patches itself so
you don't need git-debcherry then.)
Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.