Re: Two django packages for Debian?
On 6 August 2014 14:18, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
> On Aug 06, 2014, at 08:47 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
>>(That said I'm also rather annoyed by the fact that the team hasn't switched
>>to git yet.)
>
> We've had these discussions on this mailing list before, but I think we should
> discuss it at Debconf. While obviously we won't have full representation
> (whatever that means ;) from team members, we should take advantage of the
> high bandwidth setting to discuss the future vcs for the Python teams.
>
> In the past we've all had the important and worthy goal of using a consistent
> packaging and workflow for team maintained projects. However, if folks are
> abandoning the team in order to use git, then we already have fragmentation,
> and it will only increase. I'm not particularly a git fan, but it's clear
> where this is heading. :)
>
> I don't think the question is if, but when and how. There are at least two
> git-based packaging tools and workflows: gbp and git-dpm. In my limited
> exposure, I've had problems with the former but have been pretty happy with
> the latter. There's also this interesting thread:
>
I am on the edge. I prefer dgit, as it's the only one the guarantees
round-trip save with the archive even when someone NMUs things without
using dgit.
However, it does not integrate with git-dpm at the moment and there is
no clear conversion / vcs history import available. Do we care about
preserving vcs history for our packages? Do we want synthetic history
(e.g. per upload granularity)?
--
Regards,
Dimitri.
Reply to: