Hello gregor,
On Tue 04 Feb 2020 at 06:58PM +01, gregor herrmann wrote:
>> I would like to base my packaging on my upstream git tags, and not
>> import CPAN tarballs. I.e. for an upstream release, I would upload to
>> CPAN, but the orig.tar would be a `git archive` of my signed git tag,
>> not the CPAN dist tarball. And d/watch would point to my git repo, not
>> to CPAN.
>
> Out of curiosity: Why? Which big advantages do you see with this
> workflow?
After tagging a new upstream release, and uploading to CPAN, I can stay
on the same git branch to do the Debian upload, i.e.,
% dzil release
% dch -v1.2.3-1 New upstream release.
% git commit debian/changelog -mchangelog
% git deborig
% dgit sbuild --run-autopkgtest --run-piuparts
% dgit push-source
% git push --follow-tags salsa master:master
If I use CPAN tarballs, then I have to switch over to a different branch
which is based on CPAN tarballs, import the CPAN tarball, and prepare
the upload from there.
For some reason I find this really annoying; where I'm upstream and also
(primary) Debian package maintainer, I really like to stay on just one
branch, and use `git deborig` to handle tarballs.
>> Is it okay with you all for me to effectively pretend the package does
>> not exist on CPAN for the purposes of pkg-perl?
>
> I don't see any real blockers, just some small disadvantages: Both
> our tools and the finger memories of many of us are focused on CPAN
> tarballs, so you might miss out on some minor features in tooling and
> cause minor confusion among potential other contributors amoung the
> team.
Okay -- if the confusion really did start to get in people's way, I
could switch over to CPAN tarballs.
Thanks -- will go ahead with using my workflow.
--
Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature