On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 09:53:15 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> On 13-Feb-2016, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > IMHO Git is not too hard to use unless you use git-buildpackage
> > workflow.
>
> (That seems strange to me: hard to use if using ‘git-buildpackage’?
That's right. IMHO packaging without GBP is much simpler and straightforward.
GBP forces maintainer to do unnecessary things like to fiddle with "upstream"
and "pristine-tar" branches which is a hassle for packages where DFSG
repackaging is necessary. GBP implies profound competence with git which is
an obstacle for those who understand packaging but not necessary confident
with git. So many times merge conflicts in "gbp import-orig" left me
frustrated... I tried GBP few times but found that I work faster and with
more comfort without it.
> I
> think you mean the opposite sense “not too hard to use if you use
> ‘git-buildpackage’ workflow”.)
No I meant "easier without git-buildpackage". ;)
Maybe that's just me... I like git though but I don't like GBP workflow...
--
Best wishes,
Dmitry Smirnov.
---
Our difficulties and our dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes on
them.
-- Winston Churchill
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.