Re: dgit and git-dpm
Bernhard R. Link writes ("Re: dgit and git-dpm"):
> To do an NMU, one has to generate a debdiff anyway to post it to the
> bug report (as the rules for NMUs mandate).
Generating it and reading it are two different things.
As I say, I intend for dgit to be able to send the debdiff to the BTS
all by itself.
> And the debdiff is the real difference so the real changes done, so
> worth looking at.
This presupposes that there is a significant risk of something
unexpected showing up in the debdiff.
> How is being quite sure what would be in there with dgit that much
> different as with other NMUs? Where is the difference to
> "I just applied those two patches from the BTS and changed
> debian/rules the way described in debian/changelog.
> Why should I look at the debdiff? I know I changed nothing else."?
The point is that the dgit user probably will have done git diff
before dgit build / push. git diff provides a more convenient diffing
tool than debdiff, and eyeballing the same thing twice is makework.