Alexander Schmehl <tolimar@debian.org> writes: > * Reinhard Tartler <siretart@tauware.de> [060814 12:35]: > >> I'd prefer having the full source in svn. At least for the packages >> 'scorched3d' and 'openal', possibly for 'freealut' as well. > > May I ask why? We rarely change anything of upstream, and even then the > consesus seems to be to use some kind of patch management system. So > why do we put the full source under version control? At least for scorched3d, I actively work with upstream on the current cvs to get our patches merged in. Openal/Freealut is on my list and comes when I'm happy with scorched3d. >> As I don't use svn-buildpackage at all, removing the source from the >> SVN makes it painful for me to construct the source package. > > wget http://our.project.webspace/package-foo.orig.tar.gz Do all members have access to put files in that place? where is it actually? > tar -xzvf package-foo.orig.tar.gz > cd package-foo > svn export /where/ever/the/debian/dir/is > dpkg-builspackage -uc -us -S -rfakeroot > Done. > > Doesn't seem that painfull to me; you need to do most of that anyway. I prefer this: svn co svn+ssh://costa.debian.org/ build-dir cd build-dir debuild -b If I change something upstream, I can commit it in place. Creating a source package for uploading requires manual care anyway. This way, I don't have to configure svn-buildpackage in all chroots to point to the orig tarball. (yes, I have many chroots, as I'm testbuilding in both debian and ubuntu chroots) -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
Attachment:
pgpQz1S9qLUfK.pgp
Description: PGP signature