Re: The Difference between debcheckout and dgit and what they try to accomplish
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:47:38AM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
> We could try to write a tool which tries to guess and convert (e.g.) the
> dgit view with your changes into a maintainer workflow, but there are
> large obstacles to this working reliably. For example, there exist edge
> cases such that there is no algorithm which can determine, for any
> possible Debian source package tree committed to git, whether it is
> patches-applied or patches-unapplied. And there are so many small
> variations on workflows that such a tool would have to be very complex.
What if you took away the necessary guesswork?
Have dgit support a field in debian/control that, if it exists, explains
to dgit (and any other tool that might care) what the workflow type is.
This would require a categorization of all the possible git layouts, and
would initially obviously not support all of them.
But once it exists, it would allow behaviour for a hypothetical "dgit
create-merge-request" command or some such, where if the field exists in
debian/control a merge request is posted to salsa in the correct
fashion; and if the field does *not* exist in debian/control, it would
then instead simply be a wrapper around 'git format-patch' and/or 'git
send-email'.
This would, as an aside, also allow maintainers to express that they
would prefer merge requests in salsa over patches in the bts, so would
have use beyond dgit.
--
To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy
-- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard
Reply to: