On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:08:24PM +0000, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 30.01.2008, 21:22 +0100 schrieb Pierre Habouzit: > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 06:38:01PM +0000, Daniel Leidert wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, den 30.01.2008, 12:31 -0500 schrieb Joey Hess: > > > > Daniel Leidert wrote: > > > > > Why should I mirror the upstream VCS and blow up > > > > > svn.d.o or my own VCS servers? > > > > > > > > Because disk space is so much cheaper than your time that I can't even > > > > find the adjectives to describe how much cheaper it is? > > > > > > My current workflow is fast enough. > > > > That's what I thought back when I used svn. I know I was wrong. > > > > > I already explained, that I perfectly work with the debian/-only setup > > > (without symlinking or exporting anything, as suggested by different > > > people). So why do you argue with "my" time? Putting the whole source > > > under VCS and checking it out makes this workflow slower and not > > > faster IMHO. > > > > Well, the point is that your repository isn't self contained in that > > case. > > My VCS always contains a debian/watch file or a get-orig-source target. > So everything necessary is available. Nope, you don't have the merge capabilities of your $SCM to backport patches, and see them automagically go away when you package the next upstream release. > > Thanks to my workflow and pristine-tar, my $SCM holds _everything_ > > from what I need to regenerate the orig.tar.gz, to my packaging, my > > patches, and the upstream sources. > > Not different to mine, except one has to run uscan, apt-get source or > debian/rules get-orig-source. I only need one tool, $SCM. > Taking a look at the description of pristine-tar, I could of course > put the .tar.gz under version control (AFAIK several projects using > the mergeWithUpstream mode put the .orig.tar.gz under version > control). You're wrong, I don't store the whole orig.tar.gz, I keep its content, and the delta (often less than 2kb). Each new upstream release costs little extra size, and the more revisions there are, the less additionnal size I need (because there are already enough good files to make good deltas in the repository). The more a git repository grows, the slowest. > To be honest: Why should I care about an upstream tarball, that is older > than everything in the Debian archive back to oldstable? I can see that you never packaged anything complicated, just by that assertion. History is important, a full VCS history is even better, because you can tell when a change (think regression) occured, and understand why. Of course, if you never look at your upstream code, I understand that you may not care. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpTQ7oLJX4Tc.pgp
Description: PGP signature