[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: Final update of DEP-14 on naming of git packaging branches



On 2020-08-31 at 06:49, Paride Legovini wrote:

> Simon McVittie wrote on 30/08/2020:
> 
>> On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 at 15:36:53 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> 
>>> If I know that the next upstream release breaks backwards
>>> compatitibly and that it will have to mature a long time in
>>> experimental until all other packages are ready, I might start
>>> to package it rigth now in debian/experimental and continue to
>>> use debian/latest for my unstable uploads.
>> 
>> If that's your workflow (the same as src:dbus, where versions
>> 1.13.x are a development branch not recommended for general use),
>> then I don't think debian/latest is a good name for that branch,
>> and I'd recommend using debian/unstable for your unstable uploads.
>> 
>> Rationale: it seems very confusing if a branch with "latest" in its
>> name does not contain the newest available version :-)
> 
> +1, moreover I find that "latest" does not convey the idea of
> something that is in development: I tend to think about it in terms
> of "latest release" or "latest version", something that is set
> already.
> 
> This is fine with uptream/latest, as we import the latest *released* 
> version of the upstream source, not the current work in progress
> tip.

I'd tend to agree with this.

> Personally I'd prefer 'debian/devel': clearly the branch where 
> development happens.

But what about cases where what would have been the 'master' branch
tracks what's in e.g. sid and is being temporarily left to sit, except
for bugfixes et cetera, while actual development happens somewhere else
(e.g., in experimental)? Calling the replacement branch 'devel' then
still gives the impression that that is where development is happening,
but in such a case, that impression is misleading.

The primary sense of "master" as a branch name in this context, as I
understood it, was something like "the branch which everything else
should be considered to be in some sense derived from"; experience seems
to show that that sense allows for considerable versatility. IMO we
should aim to retain that meaning in whatever name is chosen to replace
'master', for minimum disruption - and for the minimum semantic
difference from that sense, IMO the closest fit I've seen yet is
'primary'.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: