Re: dgit and upstream git repos
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> On `source code': I think everyone should have the same definition of
> `source code' for git as for tarballs.
I understand why you feel this way, particularly given the tools that
you're working on, but this is not something I'm going to change as
upstream. Git does not contain generated files, and the tarball release
does, because those two things are for different audiences. Including the
generated files in Git generates a bunch of churn and irritating problems
on branch merges for no real gain for developers. Not including them
makes it impossible for less sophisticated users to deploy my software
from source on older systems on systems that do not have Autoconf and
friends installed for whatever reason. Both of those are real use cases I
regularly encounter, and having different contents in Git and the release
tarball solves both use cases quite well, with only a minor and
easily-automated inconvenience for packaging tools.
I say this not to pick a fight, since it's totally okay with me that you
feel differently, but to be clear that, regardless of preferences, the
reality that we'll have to deal with is that upstreams are not going to
follow this principle. I know I'm not alone in putting my foot down on
this point.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: