On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 09:46:13 +0100, Jérémy Lal wrote: > Hi, > if one manages two versions of a software : > 2.0, the latest, which goes to experimental > and 1.0.x, still maintained by upstream, going to unstable. > > What's the best way to name gbp branches ? > I thought of something like : > 2.0 1.0.x > master master-1.0.x > upstream upstream-1.0.x > pristine-tar pristine-tar-1.0.x > > is there some common practice ? I usually use something like: master <> exp/master for, respectively, unstable and experimental and upstream <> exp/upstream. You can achieve the latter by passing --upstream-branch=exp/upstream to git-import-orig. If you don't expect new upstream versions of 1.0.x for unstable (which AIUI is not the case for your software), you could use "upstream" both for unstable *and* experimental (i.e. just "git import-orig" in the correct order). You'll just need to use some appropriate switches when building. Now you can run git-buildpackage. Depending on the branch you're on (master or exp/master), it will use that as "debian branch". Then you need to specify the upstream branch: $ git-buildpackage --upstream-branch=exp/upstream This is for building the experimental version, in case the upstream branches are split. If you use a unified upstream branch, i.e. only the latest code is available there (2.0), and you need to build the unstable version, you can even use tags: $ git-buildpackage --upstream-branch=upstream/1.0.x I don't know if there's any better layout though :) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature