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

Re: Proposal: Switch to linear git history



Hi

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-06-13 at 20:48 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > What is not longer possible in non-confusing ways is to use branches
> > named after Debian distributions.  We would either need to do non fast
> > forward or do --their merges.  Both variants are highly confusing to
> > users and the later one even got the same problems that I just described
> > above.
> For testing/unstable and for stable-backports suites I agree we
> shouldn't do this any more.  The -backports changes will need to
> rebased when switching from e.g. 6.10.x to 6.11.x.

Okay.  We can then still work on reducing the differences and maybe at
same time we only have a single changelog entry left.  But this is for
another day.

> Having said that, a rebase isn't much more reviewable than a merge, so
> I would prefer not to rebase -backports for upstream stable updates. 
> While merges for such updates are not automatic, the conflicts are in
> practice trivial.

Those are forward merges, not in both directions and not including huge
version ranges.  So that should be way easier manageable.

> > > ## Proposal
> > > 
> > > Stop merging back changes, but create version distinct branches.
> > > Something like that:
> > master: uploaded to experimental
> Call this debian/latest so we follow DEP-14 as far as possible.

I'm a bit reluctant on the latest, but well.  The rest of the world
agreed on main.

> > -> debian/release/6.6: uploaded to unstable and stable releases
> >    -> debian/security/6.6.1+1: extra security releases
> I would prefer to use suite names in these branch names, to make
> itclearer what the branches correspond to.  So those would be:
> - debian/6.6/unstable

How do you think the transition to stable will happen?  Just leave it
this way?

I would prefer to directly use the release name, aka
"debian/6.6/trixie", because this is what the package is destined for.
That it is uploaded to unstable (or to (testing-)proposed-updates) is
part of the technical implementation, but it does not change our policy
for it (same version range etc, or did I miss some differences?).

> - debian/6.6/bookworm-backports
> - debian/6.6.1+1/booxie-security [*]
> (swapping the release and suite so that they don't actually conflict
> with DEP-14 branch names).

Okay.

We can then also use "debian/6.6/experimental" or "debian/6.6/latest",
if necessary.

Bastian

-- 
A father doesn't destroy his children.
		-- Lt. Carolyn Palamas, "Who Mourns for Adonais?",
		   stardate 3468.1.


Reply to: