git layout for clisp [was Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs]
- Subject: git layout for clisp [was Re: Patch fixing build failures of clisp on several archs]
- From: email@example.com (Sébastien Villemot)
- Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:17:43 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <49368D75-1970-4C77-9132-A60E2D5206A8@mailworks.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <88273195-3EEE-455E-AB8E-DF4DEA52417B@mailworks.org> <email@example.com> <53744A41-96DE-434B-8534-34110011C3A1@mailworks.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:13:35PM +0200, S?bastien Villemot wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 09:22:07AM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
> > > BTW, the git repository of clisp packaging is rather complex with many
> > > different branches (even one branch per release recently), making the
> > > git-buildpackage workflow uneasy.
> > My workflow predates a lot of the tooling available now...
> > I could not find another way of having ?clean? patches against upstream then
> > by doing a ?git rebase? when a new upstream release comes out.
> The typical master/upstream repository layout is the following:
> - the upstream branch contains successive versions of the upstream source; no
> debian packaging on this branch
> - the master branch contains the unpacked debian package (i.e. upstream +
> debian/ subdirectory); this is where you commit your changes to the
> packaging; upstream is periodically merged into master when a new release is
> to be packaged
Just to let you know that, with my latest clisp upload, I switched to the more
traditional git branch setup described above.
Please let me know if this is a problem.
??????? S?bastien Villemot
??????? Debian Developer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available