I don't know.
As I said in my mail I'm not even sure there's a problem here.

Let me give a bit of background here.
Ian and I had what I thought was a really exciting call about git and
source packages and stuff.

It sounded like Ian hopes we'll some day get rid of patches-unapplied
data models from our processes.  To do that, there needs to be something
to replace gbp pq in terms of simplicity and something that the average
developer can understand.  I said that I really didn't think git-dpm
counted; I liked git-dpm but found gbp pq lots simpler.  Ian nominated
git-debrebase as a gbp pq replacement.

I said I'd look.
My conclusion is that it's certainly a git-dpm replacement, and I'll
look at whether it is as easy to use in practice as gbp pq, but then I
wrote that note saying that I think its docs are harder to approach.

I think the one explicit concrete suggestion I'd make is to make it so a
casual user can read git-debrebase (1) without git-debrebase(5)
Or something so there's one man page that a user can start with that
tells them enough to get going, and that they can approach git-debrebase
without dgit.


1) dgit is more complex and has more failure modes because as we all
know, turning a git tree into a quilt dsc is really hard.

2) I think we're hoping eventually that pushing to salsa does the
dgit-like-thing (possibly by calling dgit) and users don't need to do
that themselves.

Reply via email to