[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Status of dgit (good for NMUs and fast-forwarding Debian branches)

Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:31:32AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> I think Adam's point is that there's a one-to-one correspondance
>> between a 3.0 (quilt) package and a 3.0 (git) package that consists
>> solely of an import of the most recent upstream source plus one commit
>> per patch.

> You can trim the history at any commits you want.

Trimming the history of commits doesn't help.  In order to have something
that's equivalent from a license review standpoint, you have to rebase all
of the commits into something akin to the quilt presentation, which means
merging commits that make a single change in multiple chunks, collapsing
history, and so forth.  Otherwise, all the intermediate commits have to be
double-checked for licensing, which is exactly the concern.

> Why?  You get a working repository that's hash-compatible with upstream.
> It has anything you need for forward work.

You don't because you have to rebase to get the commit count down to a
managable review load, as mentioned above.

> A good majority of free software projects use git, so requiring
> knowledge of git is not a big downside.  Not so with something as
> obscure as quilt...

The difference is that you don't need to know anything at all about quilt
to pull the patches out of the package, and patches are a much more
widely-used format than Git.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: