Re: Question to candidates: what are your quantitative diversity goals and metrics?
Salvo Tomaselli <tiposchi@tiscali.it> writes:
> I am also the original author of packages, and since I am told that
> salsa is only for debian and upstream projects are not supposed to be
> there, for me it is easier to keep packaging and development on a single
> repository. Which of course can't be salsa.
The approach I take for this is that I maintain both the upstream and the
Debian packaging in a separate repository, but each time I upload the
package to Debian, I push both to Salsa as well. (Since my packaging
branch is based on the upstream branch, pushing both ensures anyone else
who needs to pick up the packaging has all of the history and doesn't take
more resources.) It's only one more step at the end of an upload and
fairly easy to remember, and that means that I can take MRs for the
packaging from Salsa. One of the nice advantages of Git is that it's
almost as easy to push the code multiple places as it is to push it one
place.
The hard part, I admit, is watching both Salsa and my regular issue
tracker for issues and merge requests, and that's a little annoying, but
it feels worth it to make it easier for people to submit MRs for my
packages in a standard environment.
Getting my notifications set up properly in Salsa so that I don't miss
things that go there is still a bit of a work in progress.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: