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