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

Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:23 PM, intrigeri <intrigeri@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> (meta: I'm Vasudev's AM ;)
> Vasudev Kamath wrote (12 Oct 2012 03:31:39 GMT) :
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> wrote:
>>> New repository for the squeeze branch feels wrong to me
> FWIW it feels wrong to me to. That's what branches are for.
> Note that branches in the same repository don't necessarily have to
> share common ancestors: e.g. the pristine-tar branch, when using gbp +
> pristine-tar, does not share its history with the upstream and
> packaging branches.

>> Well it is actually wrong but I can't see other altenative but
>> I think I will try it on -mentors and see if others have any
>> good idea.
>> One thing I can think is just remove existing suckless-tools
>> repository (I any how have my local copy) then rename
>> suckless-tools-38 to suckless-tools and on top of this import my 39
>> work so 38 history and 39 both can leave together. Let me see
> Rewriting already published branches' history is a no-go.

Yes but 39 version isn't uploaded yet so do you think its published!

> What I would suggest is:
>   * create a squeeze branch in the existing repository (from scratch,
>     no shared ancestors)
>   * import the needed and missing (older) version into the squeeze
>     branch

OK I will try that!

>   * git checkout master && git merge -s ours squeeze

Well I don't really think I can merge it back to master! Reason master
has gone in a different path 38 version is a native package and 39 is
3.0 quilt format with multi orig tarballs! To give more idea on what
I'm talking please have a look at [1]

[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/suckless-tools-39.git;a=summary

So what really I was doing is prepared a new repository importing
suckless-tools 38-1 version and once 38-2 is uploaded I was planning
to get the patches of 39 repo and apply it to suckless-tools-38
repository. I agree it is rewriting of history but I thought that is
better alternative I had.

> Also, given "previous maintainer had his own repository in his own
> domain", importing their history, merged with "ours" strategy, may be
> an option too.

Well unfortunately that repository no more exists! I don't know what
happened but I guess either domain moved or something else happened.


Vasudev Kamath

Reply to: