Hi Axel, Sorry for the late reply, I was a bit occupied with my school homework.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 8:59 AM Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org> wrote: > > So I created one with the latest dsc (4.2.1-3+deb8u1) and added 2 > > commits on top of it. > > Thanks for the effort, but this seems to have a separate git root > (why?!?) instead of being simply based on the tag debian/4.2.1-3 which > points to commit 80eaffbae4363a79987e0e9fc07d1df96e0abd83. It's a different root because I took the latest .dsc and created a branch from there. More on this below. > I fixed it by cherry-picking and applying your relevant commits — with > proper commit messages _NOT_ including the whole (!) debian/changelog > in the commit message but just the relevant entry — on top of the old > jessie branch and force pushed it. > > (And unless "gbp dch" is used, I prefer to keep debian/changelog in > sync with the packaging changes and not adding debian/changelog > entries in a separate commit. But I didn't merge those two commits of > yours as I wasn't sure about the reasons for that and it's a > style/workflow thing and might subject to taste.) Indeed, like many others, I like to keep changelog entries separate. And the reasoning behind this is it actually helps when I have to backport stuff, so merging branches becomes easier with the only conflict in the d/ch file and I can just fix it because it's all tied together in a single commit. But that said, of course, everybody has a different way and I respect that, so thanks for fixing it! :) > > By importing the dsc and creating a branch out of it, the commit history, > > I am afraid, is lost. > > I don't see why this is necessary nor how this could have happened at > all. The task would have been so simple.. Actually, it was intentional and my follow-up question (about you wanting to restore all that) was to know if you actually want all the history back or not. But you already did restore, so all good, thanks! > > Do you want to restore all that? > > I already fixed it (except for tags, but you didn't seem to have > pushed the one expected tag anyways), because I was annoyed even > before I read that far in your mail. Yes, I didn't push the tag because I never uploaded it to jessie. I just prepared the upload and shall only tag the commit once I *actually* upload. I am sure you'd *not* want (me) to tag releases w/o actually uploading? :) > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/screen/-/commits/jessie/ now has a > proper history again. Ack, thanks. But...(more below). > > I'll be happy to do that after checking out from master and then > > applying +deb8u1 changes and then pushing mine on top of it, but I > > don't see any value to it, really. > > Huh, "no value"?!? Sorry, but a proper versioning is _essential_. Maybe I wasn't clear because there seems to be a misunderstanding here. When I said "no value", I meant not for the versioning part but "no value" in restoring all the history for the jessie branch. Because you see, next time somebody does the upload for jessie (or for stretch some years later) might not really care about pushing to salsa. Exactly what happened for deb8u1 upload. The general workflow is to get the latest dsc from the pool, do changes on top of that, and upload. And repeat. And this is because we don't expect all maintainers to actually keep a jessie branch alive and stuff. And some maintainers really, really don't like to be contacted for such trivial things. So we don't really disturb them from our end unless needed. Hopefully, I gave you the bigger picture and the real reasoning behind my "no value" phrase. Please let me know if it's still not clear or anything. I'll be happy to expand more! > Regards, Axel (not amused) ... :( - u
