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

Re: Use of 'debian/latest' in Go team as the default branch name



Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> writes:

> Can we agree to update the Go team policy to follow this and default
> to 'debian/latest' going forward?
>
> There are <2000 packages in Debian that use the 'debian/sid' branch
> name, and out of these ~1300 are from the Go team. The Go team should
> not diverge from general Debian practices unless there is a proper
> cause. The current situation is only due to historical reasons.

In my experience a lot of Debian packages use a 'master' branch, and use
of debian/* is fairly low with the Go and Python teams being exceptions.

I think the contentious part is about enforcing new rules.
Traditionally all new rules are incrementally adopted, and we still have
packages using pre-2017 workflow.  I don't find this problematic.  I
think it is a good approach to organically improve and revise workflow
patterns and eventually see what sticks and works in practice.  So while
I'm happy to see updated package workflow documentation on some things
that were unclear, I'm less convinced about making changes to packages
just to make changes.  The workflow should serve package maintainers,
not vice versa.

But all this is a bit hypothetical, and more documentation how to change
things would make it easier for me consider adapting.  Using the 'salsa'
tool with SALSA_TOKEN set is probably a deal breaker for me to opt-in on
anything, I dislike storing privileged security tokens in clear-text on
developer laptops and find it a bad enough pattern to resist all
attempts to require it.  I'm sure others have equally strange and
sometimes incompatible preferences, and while it is easy to dismiss
those it may be more successful to provide alternatives.

/Simon

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: