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

Re: Converting to dgit

On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 07:36:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> That said, gbp pq does something else I really like, namely it exports in
> the source package all of the metadata that anyone else would need to pick
> up the package without needing a copy of my Git repository (except for
> history).

git-dpm does too, and I agree it's nice.

> That specifically means I want separated upstream patches in
> debian/patches, which in turn means I may as well be using 3.0 (quilt).
> (See my comment in the other thread about 3.0 (quilt) being an interchange
> format between VCSs.)  If as you say above git-dpm produces a
> patches-applied tree, I don't see how it could preserve that (very
> important) property, although maybe I'm missing something?

It produces a patches-applied tree *and* the separated upstream patches
in debian/patches/.  You never actually touch the latter by hand;
they're purely an export format.

Briefly, when you want to edit upstream patches, you bracket your
operations with "git-dpm checkout-patched" / "git-dpm update-patches";
the update-patches operation constructs a merge of the (possibly
rebased) tip of the patched branch (i.e. upstream source as patched, no
packaging files) into master or whatever you're calling your primary
Debian branch, and arranges for that merge commit to include an updated
export of upstream..patched into quilt-compatible files in

I had a mild initial reaction to the duplicated information, but after a
trial run decided that I liked the results easily enough to outweigh

> I think the rebased set of patches is far, far less useful if they
> exist only in my Git repository and not in the Debian source package,
> but maybe git-dpm puts them there as well in some way that I don't
> understand?

Yes, it absolutely does.  See e.g. openssh if you want to peer at a
medium-sized example.

Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson@debian.org]

Reply to: