Bernhard R. Link writes ("Re: dgit and git-dpm"): > To do an NMU, one has to generate a debdiff anyway to post it to the > bug report (as the rules for NMUs mandate).
Generating it and reading it are two different things. As I say, I intend for dgit to be able to send the debdiff to the BTS all by itself. > And the debdiff is the real difference so the real changes done, so > worth looking at. This presupposes that there is a significant risk of something unexpected showing up in the debdiff. > How is being quite sure what would be in there with dgit that much > different as with other NMUs? Where is the difference to > "I just applied those two patches from the BTS and changed > debian/rules the way described in debian/changelog. > Why should I look at the debdiff? I know I changed nothing else."? The point is that the dgit user probably will have done git diff before dgit build / push. git diff provides a more convenient diffing tool than debdiff, and eyeballing the same thing twice is makework. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/21591.50585.124208.288...@chiark.greenend.org.uk