On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 10:17:51PM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> I am probably a bit old school, but i really like having only debian/ in
> .diff.gz.
All the points you are raising are addressed by git with other means
(i.e. /me agrees with Remi position here).
Even pushing upstream is not a big deal, it is just a matter of using
git diff / git format-patch properly (this, as long as patches are kept
as separate topic branches of course).
The only remaining problem not addressed by git is how to present a
series of commented patches to who is *not* using git. E.g. Random J.
Developer which is doing apt-get source foo. Regarding this problem I
consider that:
1) the amount of people which is doing apt-get source instead of
debcheckout is fading, it will probably decrease more and more in the
future
2) we need a project wide best practice on how to handle those cases.
I've tried starting some discussions on this on -devel in the past
with not much success, it is worth trying again
In the meantime I suggest starting with topic branches for patches wrt
upstream, documenting topic branches in README.source. This would lead
to a "dirty" .diff.gz, but all the information to clean it up will be
there.
Then having a script to automate generation of patches from topic
branches will be wonderful to have, but not mandatory to start working.
If someone is willing to work on that, I suggest to do that in a more
general context than d-o-m, other people on -devel may be both
interested and can help out to create a generic solution.
Cheers
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
I'm still an SGML person,this newfangled /\ All one has to do is hit the
XML stuff is so ... simplistic -- Manoj \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature