Re: RFC: DEP-14: Recommended layout for Git packaging repositories
On Tue, 11 Nov 2014, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> following the initial discussion we had in August
> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/08/thrd2.html#00499), I have
> written a first draft of the Debian Enhancement Proposal that I suggested.
> It's now online at http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep14 and also attached
> below so that you can easily reply and comment.
>
> I have left one question where I have had conflicting feedback
> and I'm not sure what's best. Thus I will welcome a larger set of
> opinions on this specific question (search for "QUESTION" in the
> text).
...
> The Git repository listed in debian/control's `Vcs-Git` field should
> usually have its HEAD point to the branch corresponding to the
> distribution where new upstream versions are usually sent. For Debian,
> it will usually be `debian/sid` (or sometimes `debian/experimental`).
>
> QUESTION: some people have argued to use debian/master as the latest
> packaging targets sometimes sid and sometimes experimental. Should we
> standardize on this? Or should we explicitly allow this as an alternative?
Please allow debian/master as an alternative. It fits with the general git
usage of "master", it fits with the workflow of several packages, where you
do experimental->unstable, and it is not going to surprise anyone that has
even a passing knowledge of the usual git conventions.
In fact, I was quite non-amused by the initial versions of this idea, but
reading this latest version, I must say I *like* it. Well done! I am
especially happy about the way it respects the usual git usage conventions,
this will ease its adoption a lot.
It does fail to mention security, and stable-proposed branches. We can just
leave those to maintainer's discretion, of course.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: