[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ad-hoc survey of existing Debian git integration tools

Felipe Sateler writes ("Re: Ad-hoc survey of existing Debian git integration tools"):
> On 29 July 2015 at 07:34, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > If you are an NMUer or a downstream using dgit, you should usually
> > make plain git commits (with no changes to the patch stack).  dgit
> > will generate a separate patch for each of your commits.  You should
> > leave rebasing/squashing/refreshing to the maintainer.  This rule is
> > necessary because if two developers both rebase/squash/refresh in
> > parallel, it is difficult to merge their work.
> OK, so for a regular maintainer using quilt and git-buildpackage, the
> only change to integrate dgit into the workflow is to replace `gbp
> buildpackage && dput` with `dgit git-build && dgit push`?

Maybe.  I'm afraid I don't know for sure how gbp works so it may be
that the workflow is more complicated.

I got the impression that gbp normally works with a patches-unapplied
tree.  Is that correct ?  If so then an additional gbp step may be
needed, to convert the tree to patches-applied.

Each of Debian's git integration and patch management tools seems to
have invented its own: branch structure; git tree contents rules;
workflow; approach to documentation.

I'm hoping that there will come to be documentation about how to use
each one with dgit.  I think that documentation depends mostly on
properties of the tool and ought probably to live in the tool package.

I'm thinking of filing wishlist bugs against gbp and git-dpm, along
these lines, at least.  But I need to write up something useful that
explains to the maintainer of each git-foo tool what the technical
requirements are (and give some hints about what information the user
is likely to want).


Reply to: