Re: RFC: DEP-14: Recommended layout for Git packaging repositories
Hi,
On Tue, 11 Nov 2014, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Packaging branches and tags
> > ===========================
> >
> > Packaging branches should be named according to the codename of the
> > target distribution. In the case of Debian, that means for example
> > `debian/sid`, `debian/jessie`, `debian/experimental`,
> > `debian/wheezy`, `debian/wheezy-backports`, etc. We specifically avoid
> > "suite" names because those tend to evolve over time ("stable" becomes
> > "oldstable" and so on).
> >
> > 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`).
>
> I find this paragraph confusing. With gbp, this is where new Debian
> developments are made, and new upstream versions are sent to
> upstream/xxx. Or do you mean something else here?
Is it clearer if I rewrite it this way ?
« The Git repository listed in debian/control's `Vcs-Git` field should
usually have its HEAD point to the branch where new upstream versions
are being packaged. For Debian, it will usually be `debian/sid` (or
sometimes `debian/experimental`) »
> Interesting. Assuming a normal Debian package that has just a few
> backports (as opposed to every sid release being backported), and which
> imports only upstream tarballs/snapshots (not the whole history), I
> expect that a high proportion of the commits would happen on this
> branch. In which case, why not make it 'master', without debian/ ? Is it
> (only) in order to cleanly support multiple vendors?
Henrique answered to that. The non-prefixed namespace is dedicated
to upstream development.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Support Debian LTS: http://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html
Learn to master Debian: http://debian-handbook.info/get/
Reply to: