Re: Survey: git packaging practices / repository format

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Survey: git packaging practices / repository format"):
> xorg-team (e.g. mesa)
> =====================
> 
> Tree contains: upstream files from a git tag (not identical to the
> upstream `make dist` tarball), sometimes with extra commits cherry-picked
> Changes to upstream source are: applied directly or via d/patches,
> sometimes a mixture within the same package
> Baseline upstream: changelog version => .orig tarball; files that
> exist in git but not in the upstream tarball are compensated for by
> extend-diff-ignore in debian/source/local-options
> Patches managed by: a mixture of git cherry-pick and quilt

I'm not sure if you know the answer to this, but I thought of a
question or two:

Apart from the extra files, these orig tarballs must be identical to
the files in git, or dpkg-source would complain about the differences.
So presumably when you say "changelog version => .orig tarball" you
actually mean => some git tag, from which a tarball is made ?

Or do you mean the git tag is the one corresponding to some upstream
version ?  Does it have a systematic name ?  Is it made by upstream ?
The more I think about this the more puzzled I seem.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.