Re: dpkg-source's future and relation with VCS
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> For me this sentence is the essence of your mail: That you dislike
> Joey's idea since it includes the VCS in the source package itself and
> would prefer that we worked on creating a solution on top of wig&pen
> Do I understand that correctly?
No. I don't dislike it at all, I do like distributed VCS and the workflow
and I believe that when upstream is using a DVCS, the $vcs.tar.gz is a
really nice approach.
However I'm also convinced that:
- a source package should be unpackable without a VCS. This means that
somehow it should contain a checkout that can be extracted with basic
- it will take several years until we can standardize on VCS-based source
package whereas the switch to wig&pen can be quick. In the mean time, a
nice intermediary solution is to generate the wig&pen source package
from the VCS.
 to solve this for the git case I wonder if we can take files from the
checkout and copy them (temporarily) in the .git/objects/ directory so
that we don't duplicate files and get other packs based on those
pre-existing objects ?
> > I plan to write code in that direction:
> > - clean up dpkg-source and move code in a Dpkg::Source API
> We should definetly get started doing this since it will be benefical
> for any proposal.
> > - add the API required for wig&pen
> > - make dpkg-source be able to generate wig&pen source package
> > - then add some scripts that use the wig&pen API to generate source
> > packages from a VCS directory
> The other steps will probably require us getting some common agreement
> on the direction we want to go.
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :