On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 02:33:40PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:59:00AM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > I don't think there is One True Solution, though there are probably > > ways to allow _any_ of the $DSCM to be used (and let's svn rot *cough*) > > and have some Debian specific wrappers to allow the basic operations > > (commit, checkout, ...) to be transparent to the people not knowing > > about a specific $DSCM. E.g. I discovered debcheckout(1) recently that > > uses the Vcs-* headers. This is IMHO the way to go. > > Yes. Merge is liable to be trickier since there are a couple of > different possible sets of semantics, but that's much more likely to be > an operation performed by the regular maintenance team than by a > drive-by uploader, so that doesn't worry me too much. Well, in a perfect wold, people would be able when they do a NMU e.g. to commit into a public branch with a known location, and the regular maintenance team will be the one that would merge it back into the packaging mainline. IOW in order to perform a NMU, you just need to know how to: * checkout sources, debcheckout(1) knows that ; * commit your changes, debcommit(1) knows that almost, mr(1) could also probably be of help ; * publish the changes you did somewhere until the regular maintainer fetch (sorry for the git terminology, I'll let readers adapt it to their $SCM) this branch, and merge it into their own. Those 3 operations can trivially be done through specific Debian commands without any prior knowledge of the $SCM from the NMUer, while generating something that _is_ in the workflow of the maintainer. There is a need for a place to publish random branches in a predictible way though, a .$SCM.gz is indeed a way, but there probably are other that don't really require a dpkg change. Of course, you can replace NMU with "security update" or alike actions in the previous text. > One major reason many people object to yada is that it's very easy to > think you've fixed something but then discover that the packaging system > in use reverts or otherwise breaks your change, because the files you're > expected to edit are different from other Debian packages and the > differences are not obvious to those unfamiliar with the packaging > system. So, I would go a little further than my understanding of your > comment above and say that, given a reasonable level of general > knowledge about Debian packaging (which might include standard tools not > yet written) and the basic ability to fix a bug in the upstream source, > it should be straightforward to apply that fix to the Debian package and > produce a valid uploadable result. That is, even if a reasonable number > of Debian developers can figure it out, the system should also be > accessible to people with the relevant programming skills with basic > knowledge of Debian packaging. ACK. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgp12VfPTOibW.pgp
Description: PGP signature