Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git
>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Campbell <ijc@debian.org> writes:
Ian> On Tue, 2019-05-07 at 11:01 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> That said, I think Ansgar has some really valid points. I think
>> that dgit (or git-dpm) are the hardest work flows to teach.
Ian> I think perhaps you meant `git-debrebase` rather than `dgit`
Ian> throughout the remainder of your mail, since comparing `dgit`
Ian> and `git-dpm` is (AFAIUI) a type error of sorts since they are
Ian> not serving the same purpose -- `dgit` replaces `dput` not your
Ian> patch managment system so comparing it to `git-dpm`, a patch
Ian> management system, is somewhat apples to oranges.
I'm aware I'm making a typing error, and speaking in generalities. I
agree that my statement is true for debrebase, but I meant the dgit
ecosystem.
git-dpm is harder than debrebase because it is less polished and
involves more explicit branches in some ways.
Dgit is harder overall even if you ignore debrebase because it has a lot
of moving parts that in my experience sometimes fail and because dgit
wants to get involved in your build process, wants to be aware of your
patch management, etc.
Dgit and debrebase are not really separate in terms of teaching.
If you look at the documentation for debrebase, you'll find that there
are a lot of cross references from debrebase docs to dgit.
For example if you want to talk about handling new upstreams or orig
tarballs with debrebase you need to talk about something else--either
from the dgit ecosystem or the gbp ecosystem or something.
Please understand I think dgit and debrebase are great technologies.
I'm moving towards using them more and more, and when I'm acting as a
downstream rather than a Debian developer, dgit clone is the best thing
since sliced bread. Since I've mostly stopped eating bread perhaps I
should come up with a new metaphor, but it's really neat regardless of
what metaphor I use.
Still, this stuff is hard.
Reply to: