Differences between git packaging tools (was: RFC: DEP-14: Recommended layout for Git packaging repositories)

[Nikolaus Rath <Nikolaus@rath.org>]

Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> writes:
> Having played with gitpkg some more, I'm reminded that the answer to
> this is that unlike (AIUI) both gbp-pq and git-dpm, it did not meet my
> assumption that the contents of the git tree were in a suitable form to
> run dpkg-buildpackage and have a 3.0 (quilt) Debian package fall out. I
> realise that's partly a property of 3.0 (quilt).
>
> For gitpkg, you can commit in the normal git way, but the cost is that
> you have to build in a way that isn't the normal dpkg thing (exporting
> with gitpkg and building the result).
>
> gbp-pq and git-dpm are the other way round: the tree can be built with
> dpkg-buildpackage, but the cost is that you have to commit in a way that
> isn't the normal git thing (either using a specific tool, or for the
> gbp-pq layout, dropping in pre-prepared patches and hoping they don't
> have conflicts, in the same way you might for svn-buildpackage).

This is such a nice summary that I have to quote it again just to make
it more visible.

I've been very confused by the proliferation of git packaging tools, but
this makes it a lot clearer.


Thanks!
-Nikolaus
-- 
GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F
Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F

             »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«