On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 14:03:18 +0200 Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote: > (Please trim the quoted mail when you answer) > > On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > >- are there other important things to standardize? > > > > We don't even agree on if repositories should be full source or > > Debian directory only. Not sure how we can even start to discuss > > the rest if we don't agree on that. > > I don't know of any git helper tools that work on git repositories > with Debian directory only. git-buildpackage --git-overlay > The vast majority (all?) of git packaging repositories have the > upstream sources. No. None of mine do, or will. > I think this point is not really contentious. Disagree. Having upstream sources in the packaging repository is a retrograde action. > And given the willingness to make it easier to collaborate with > upstream using git, it would be silly to not have the upstream > sources in our git repositories. Wrong - it makes a lot of sense for upstream to *not* have packaging files together with the upstream sources. It also makes good sense for the packaging to be completely separate as a maintainer. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature