Re: Feedback on 3.0 source format problems
Le 07/01/2017 à 22:10, Nikolaus Rath a écrit :
> On Jan 07 2017, Thibaut Paumard <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Well, just to say, I'm personally quite happy with '3.0 (quilt)'. I try
>> to maintain all my packages in git in unapplied state, because in my
>> opinion this is the sensible thing to do. When I do a
>> git diff upstream master
>> I want to see only debian/ in there.
> What's the point of that? If the only difference is the addition of the
> debian/ directory, you can simply look at the debian directory. There's
> no need to use git.
The point is to make sure I don't make changes to upstream by mistake.
>> I much prefer to check a diff of diff over a simple diff,
> Wow, ok. That is astonishing to hear, but I'll take your word for it.
The goal is to check that all my changes to the packaging are
intentional, again. I find it easier this way, I appreciate other people
find it easier the other way round.
>> For me the patch is the final product, I like the clear separation
>> between upstream and debian/, so it's for me a very appealing design to
>> have individual patches in debian/patches. I use git to keep the history
>> of the patch, not to manage it.
> And so is this. Well, I definitely learned something new in this thread.
Me too. My point is that this thread encourages criticism of the 3.0
source format. Most participants in this thread are not quite happy (or
quite unhappy?) with this format, but like often presumably people who
*are* happy with the format will not speak up.
I would not like the readers of the thread to come to the conclusion
that the majority is unhappy with the format, because it's not a poll.
My "Feedback on 3.0 source format problems" is that I have nothing to
declare. I take note of the various tools that have been mentioned and
will look at whether they can enhance my packaging experience when time
Kind regards, Thibaut.