Re: Enhancing 3.0 (git) source package format
]] Goswin von Brederlow
| Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> writes:
|
| > ]] Goswin von Brederlow
| >
| > | Remove 3.0 (qit) format completly. A full history bloats the source
| > | and a cut down history has no advantage over a plain source.
| >
| > I think this would be a mistake. I'm increasingly considering a full
| > git clone the source of my software (in the «preferred form of
| > modification») and so having dpkg able to natively consume and produce
| > that preferred form would be very useful.
|
| Isn't your prefered form to git clone/uppdate/merge from the actual
| repository used by the maintainer?
Not for that particular copy of the software, no.
It would be like saying that foo-1.0.tar.gz is not the preferred form of
modification since there is a foo-2.0.tar.gz out and upstream won't take
patches to 1.0 because it's dead.
| A copy of the maintainers repository as it was 2 years ago (think
| stable) is not as usefull as a fresh clone.
That depends on whether I want to fix something in the copy that is 2
years old and which is in stable, or if I want to do upstream
development. Quite often, the former is the case.
| > I don't see why you would do one or the other rather than both?
| > Being able to do git log and such on the result of an apt-get-ed
| > package is quite useful, without having to wait for a random
| > upstream git repository that might not be available.
|
| Is it? Do you actualy do that?
Yes.
| And we do have git.debian.org with high availability. It should not be
| a random upstream git that might or might not be there. Make it a
| reliable repository that will be there.
Whether git.d.o is up or not does not help me if I'm at the end of tiny
link. Also, if we go with my claim that source (in the «preferred form
for modification» sense) includes history, it means you need to ship the
history somehow. Saying «it's on git.d.o» doesn't help you then. The
suggestion to use a bundle would probably be a good enough start. I'd
like to be able to just apt-get source foo ; cd foo-* ; git log though,
but having to git clone the bundle is something I guess I can live with.
| My feeling is that 3.0 (git) format adds bloat to the source packages
| that hardly anyone ever uses, makes it that much harder for any
| non-git user to edit the source and is of little extra value when the
| maintainers git is month or years further along.
Even if the upstream VCS has moved on, you save a bit of bandwidth by
having something that comes with half the history, even if you don't
have all of it.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
Reply to: