Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?
* Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> [120119 02:29]:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 03:47:11PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > There is a lot of different opinions about wether the format is sane at
> > all. A problem with the basic idea/design of 3.0 (git) as opposed to the
> > maturity of the implementation.
>
> It is strictly better than 3.0 (quilt). For every set of tree+patches
> representable by quilt, you can produce a shallow git repository that
> contains exactly the same bits of data and nothing more.
This depends how you define "better". A source format is my eyes a way
to communicate with our users and the overall comunity. A source format
that only has the advantage of not caring if modifications to the
upstream source are not easily reviewable[1] and makes it harder for the
overall community to see our part[2] is not better. It is worse.
To avoid me repeating too much, see also
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/09/msg00484.html
Bernhard R. Link
[1] If you have a set of disjoint modifications or of modifications that
do not need some additional magic merging is trivially translateable to
a quilt series.
[2] I once for some package looked what changes other distributions had,
never had I had that many different VCSes installed. Even if upstream
uses some vcs, there surely will be some day a better one comes out or
upstream changes for other reasons, so not even using the same as
upstream helps to avoid that.
Reply to: