Clarification on the Origin: field in the Patch Tagging Guidelines?
I'm trying to understand a better way of using the Origin: field as
specified by DEP-3.
I'm currently using something like this:
since DEP-3 seems to strongly encourage a URL. But this seems really
ugly and painful to me.
>From reading the DEP-3, it mentions the use of the Commit: identifier,
but doesn't give any examples of how this would be done. Would
something like this be acceptable instead?
Origin: upstream, Commit:8f00911a21
I assume as long as there is clear documentation in where to find the
canonical upstream repository (perhaps in debian/README.source or
debian/copyright) this would be considered acceptable? Or maybe it
would be better to include a new repository designator in the Patch
What do people think?
P.S. One of the things I'm thinking about doing is writing a script which
automatically generates the debian/patches directory from the git
repository. So when I specify the base release (i.e., v1.42.4), it will
do something like git format-patch, but in a debian/patches Quilt 3.0
format. That way I don't have to replicate the patches twice in my git
tree (once as the real commit, and once in the commits which create the