On Sat, 2015-11-07 at 17:53 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 02:16:13PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > 7. The DFSG changes are not documented in the source package > > 8. Each featureset is reduced to a single patch in the source package > > > > (7) should be easy to fix, as the history is linear, except where we > > delete part of a file. > > git can generate patch files for deleted files without actually showing > the content. I know, that's why I said where we delete *part* of a file (using unifdef). However, there are currently no cases where we do that. > > (8) should be easy to fix for the 'none' > > featureset as its history will also be linear. For any other > > featuresets, reducing to a single patch may be unavoidable. > > I didn't want to enfore a linear history, but if we say it will be > linear (and check that in a hook during push), we can also generate > expanded patch series. Your description of the workflow did imply the history would be linear for the 'none' featureset. And non-linear history gets linearised when rebasing so it's probably not a good idea to introduce non-linearity in any branch that we expect to rebase later. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings 73.46% of all statistics are made up.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part