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

Re: [Ubuntu] creating GRASS packages for UbuntuGIS



On 2016-01-14 12:17, Martin Landa wrote:
2016-01-13 23:04 GMT+01:00 Bas Couwenberg <sebastic@xs4all.nl>:
When the packaging lives on a non-default branch (i.e. not master), you need to document the branch in the Vcs-Git URL and gbp.conf. See this commit for
example:


https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/grass.git/commit/?h=experimental&id=a32ba58d0e41e41b3c4608a1ee4d926fecc96d18

OK, done for ubuntugis/wily in [1]. I was just surprised that `git
commit` also push changes to the origin. So `git push` is not needed,
right?

No, `git commit` only commits in your local repository, to share the changes with the repository on Alioth used by others you need to push your local changes with `git push`, this is one of big distinctions between Subversion and Git. With SVN you commit to the shared repo, with git you commit locally. This allows you to rebase your local changes into coherent commits before pushing them to the shared repository to ease merging and review in the shared repo.

You should always push your changes before or directly after uploading the package (and tagging the release).

https://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-push-to-alioth

Did you notice the lintian warnings in your build log?

No, I checked for lintian and didn't find anything about warning? What
do you mean exactly?

Review the lintian tags in your log:

cat log.packager | awk '/+++ lintian output +++/,/+++ end of lintian output +++/' | grep -v ^+++ | less

Optionally filter out the overrides and their comments by adding ' | egrep -v "^(N|O):" before the pipe to less.

You'll see this warning for the various binary packages:

 W: grass-core: possible-new-upstream-release-without-new-version

You can lookup the extended description online, which I linked in my previous mail.

All lintian issues of severity info (I:) and higher need to be reviewed and fixed before the upload (or overridden if it's a false positive, or purposely left unaddressed, a comment should always be added to explain the override).

Kind Regards,

Bas


Reply to: