Re: git packaging workflow notes, diagram
Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.com.au> writes:
> I actually think that the comments from Joey and Russ are both very
> valuable and it would be good to get everything together into a single
> document that explains both the dual-repository approach and the
> combined approach.
Yeah, I agree. That's partly what I was trying to do with my notes, but
they need more revision, and I wouldn't at all mind the content being
copied somewhere that's more generally editable so that other workflows
can be added. (I'll probably keep maintaining my page to document
precisely what I personally do, but I can make those changes in more than
one place.)
> My comments were not intended to (and do not prevent) what either of
> them is proposing. Certainly, it was meant to raise awareness of the
> fact that files from the upstream tarball may not be in upstream's tag:
> and I simply provide one way of dealing with it, a method that is used a
> lot and that was what I came across at the time I started contributing
> packages to Debian.
> Obviously the combined approach (Russ) is really only possible if
> upstream uses git, because of it's distributed nature. The
> dual-repository approach remains relevant if upstream is on CVS or SVN
> and the Debian packages are to be maintained with git.
Indeed, that's part of why I haven't revised my notes yet. Both methods
really need to be explained.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: