Re: Git Packaging: Native source formats

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Git Packaging: Native source formats"):
> [context: git-debrebase, git-dpm]
>
> However, while analyzing a rebased branch isn't as hard for other
> people as a branch with a complex merge history, it does mean that
> upstream has to find a way to extract patches [...]
>
> [context: git-debcherry] 
> This lets you generate the patches for people on demand, but they aren't
> just sitting out there for anyone to look at whenever they want.

Yes.

> Anyway, this is probably only applicable to a minority of upstreams and
> packages, and more upstreams these days would just like all patches as
> PRs.

One way to look at all this is that fishing the patches out of
Debian's (or whatever other downstream's) processes into a
standardised form suitable for an upstream branch is work.

Nowadays most upstreams expect us to do that work.  (The same way we
expect our downstreams to file bugs, not expect us to guddle around in
their systems looking for stuff to take.)

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   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.