Re: names of distribution-branches in the git repository

[Stéphane Glondu <steph@glondu.net>]

Le 22/11/2010 09:54, Sylvain Le Gall a écrit :
> Is experimental/upstream mandatory? I thought it was possible to inject
> upstream tarball in upstream branch and merge into master (or
> experimental/master).

Then the upstream of the master branch doesn't correspond to any head?

It is convenient to have a name for the base of the patch series, and
dom-{apply,save}-patches use that. Committing stuff in the upstream
branch not meant for master might confuse these tools (and those who are
used to them :). The upstream branch also plays a role in gbp, so it
might get confused too. For example, when you don't use pristine-tar,
which might happen temporarily when you make snapshots, gbp uses that
branch to generate a tarball. Moreover, branches are cheap in git, and
cost next to nothing when they are an ancestor of another branch.

In short, experimental/upstream might not be mandatory, but having it is
convenient and avoids confusion IMHO.


Cheers,

-- 
Stéphane