Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format
Russell Stuart <russell-debian@stuart.id.au> writes:
> I don't believe that. I guess we are talking past each other. Out of
> curiosity do you do maintain the changsets manually in git, or use
> something like gquilt?
I've tried a whole bunch of different things over the years, ranging from
manually-maintained feature branches through TopGit. Currently, I'm using
gbp pq, which makes for nice separated changes but has the disadvantage of
making the history of each change irritating to view and understand (since
it involves diffs of diffs), and prevents use of native Git tools on the
history of the changes to upstream.
I'm a pretty strong believer in the merits of a rebase workflow for
exactly the reasons you stated, so I think my ideal solution is one of the
tools that maintains both a rebased branch and a merged branch with
history.
It's on my list to look at git-debrebase, which I'm hoping gives me the
pieces I want.
Note that my argument for Git is only partly about the history of upstream
changes. A lot of it for me is the history of changes to the Debian
packaging files, about pull-request workflows, and about the ease of
someone who isn't intimately familiar with Debian's tools proposing a new
change to the package. In my ideal world, someone would be able to make a
normal Git commit to the packaging repository and then push a tag and all
the right things would happen, although that's hard to achieve with a
rebase workflow.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: