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

Re: Help from Git-buildpackage experts wanted (Was: New upstream version of python-csb)

Le Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 04:27:50PM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> Hi,
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 03:44:31PM +0100, Tomás Di Domenico wrote:
> > I forgot to tell you: I had to remove the "tarball-dir" variable from
> > both my ~/.gbp.conf and the package's debian/gbp.conf for it to use the
> Removing debian/gbp.conf helped.
> (BTW, could you push this change?)
> So the question to the Git experts is: Should we advise in our policy to
> never create such a file because it is unneeded / has potential bad side
> effects or is this the wrong conclusion from this simple solution?

Hi Andreas, Tomás and everybody,

the problem is not the existence of debian/gbp.conf, but the contents.  In
particular, I never use the following settings, and I am really sorry that
they were recommended in our group policy.  I will delete it (but please
do not hesitate to object, and we can restore it after discussion).

export-dir = ../build-area/
tarball-dir = ../tarballs/

On the other hand, it is good to have "pristine-tar = True", as it avoids to
forget to pass --pristine-tar to git-buildpackage, and as it is a convenient
way to signal that the source package is managed with git-buildpackage.

Lastly, if the pristine-tar branch is causing problems, we can also deprecate
it completely and rely solely on the Debian archive as the source of pristine
tarballs.  The pristine-tar system provides a service that is not available
with subversion, and that I find useful, but that service is not crucial at

Have a nice week-end,

Charles Plessy
Illkirch-Graffenstaden, France

Reply to: