Re: Standardizing the layout of git packaging repositories
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:38:05PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> On 25 August 2014 14:34, Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org> wrote:
>
> > I'm beginning to think that what we want is for gbp and git-dpm to
> > interoperate, such that any individual maintainer can use whichever tool
> > they
> > choose, but would still allow the team to adhere to consensus
> > recommendations,
> > so there's no guesswork involved. E.g. the ultimate artifacts would end up
> > being the same, regardless of whether you used gbp, git-dpm, or plain
> > vanilla
> > git + quilt. One example of a superficial differences is the tag names
> > used
> > by default. They're different between the two helpers, but really needn't
> > be.
> >
>
> Unless I am mistaken, I think both gbp pq and git-dpm store different data
> in git, so cannot interoperate on the same tree.
>
> i.e. by the looks of it, gbp pq only bothers to keep the most recent set of
> patches in git, and stores the history of old patches old versions of
> debian/patches/.
...but you can keep (and share) old versions by tagging the commit on
the pq branch and pushing the tag. This has the advantage that it
doesn't need additional branches and that it's not fetched by default
since there's no branch you fetch with it.
Or you can fake-merge it into e.g. master. It's just that this isn't
automated in any way within gbp yet.
Cheers
-- Guido
Reply to: