Re: Proposed git migration plan
Hi Barry,
thanks for your work!
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
> Here's the page I mentioned regarding a *proposed* transition plan to using
> git for team packages. It's more or less a brain dump right now, and don't
> feel like you need to read it before the DC14 session.
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging
nothing against your effort or experiments (I really appreciate it),
but I still don't see what is the advantages of moving to Git.
It seems to me like very vocal Git fanatics, who refuse to touch any
package which is not maintained in Git (-.-), are pushing and pushing
to that VCS without any clear advantage.
Upstream releases history? why do we need to care, we are packagers we
should care about packaging commits history. ultimately, you'll always
have to deal with tarballs, so we need a tool to import released
tarballs in a VCS and then another tool to re-generate the tarball
from the VCS again? seems kinda twisted to me :) And no, not the whole
programming world is using Git for upstream code (sometimes we're not
even able to teach upstream to use proper versions), so the usual
mantra "I can pull from upstream repo and be happy ever after" is
kinda weak.
Offline commits? how many time (for real..) you badly needed it? i
guess so few that if you (for one time) just do a big commit instead
of a storm of micro commit the world wont stop
is there anything else so "attractive" about git?
If we don't define *upfront* what are the problems we currently have
and that we want to solve, then we're just proposing a technical
exercise without a real gain. and I cant stress this point never
enough.
Regards,
--
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Reply to: