Re: Simpler git workflow for packaging with upstreamless repositories

[Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>]

Hello,

On Tue 26 Nov 2024 at 11:28pm +05, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 06:53:01PM +0100, Mechtilde Stehmann wrote:
>> > One possible rebuttal to this is "gbp needs to do the right thing then".
>> > Currently gbp by default generates a broken tarball, which is also a
>> > source of confusion for many.
>>
>> Do you have a bug report number?
>
> No.
> I've found #902249 which is titled "Pull tarballs from the archive (or
> upstream location)", maybe that's the one you think about. I haven't read
> it, except for the "I hoped we could stay out of that business in 2018 but
> since tarballs are still _the_ _thing_ in Debian" line, which I liked.
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think gbp *can* do the right thing
> there. It's not my rebuttal. Maybe gbp should just refuse to generate a
> random tarball from a commit-ish and let^Wrequire people to provide one or
> provide a way to generate one in a correct way.

'origtargz' from devscripts usually does the right thing.

-- 
Sean Whitton