On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 09:32:29AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Otto Kekäläinen <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > The tag2upload service is tightly coupled with dgit, and while dgit by
> > design will never support pristine-tar type of ability to reproduce
> > upstream tarballs bit-for-bit, it should at least have the actual
> > upstream signed tags instead (from upstreams that publish them).
>
> I have been using dgit with pristine-tar for years. It works fine with
> pristine-tar. People have told you this repeatedly. Please listen to us
> and stop repeating this blatantly misleading statement in every discussion
> about dgit.
I use dgit with pristine-tar, but if I need to add patches in between
formal e2fsprogs releases, dgit is *painful*. If I need to upload to
stable backports, dgit just did't work. Ian, I think I e-mailed you a
request for help a few years ago, but you were apparently to busy to
reply, so I just gave up on it for stable backports. And if I can't
get maintenance releases doesn't work, I just fall back to the
pre-dgit workflow.
Part of this is because my workflow uses dgit plus gbp plus schroots,
with patches applied. Which is something dgit seems to only
incidently support, but the advantage of my setup is that if dgit does
blow up, and I can easily fall back to a pre-dgit workflow.
Maybe it's possible to make dgit work with my workflow, but I've spent
weekends trying to make it work, and I've since timed out. I have
higher-value work that I can do to support Linux or Debian, and trying
to bash my head against the dgit procrustean bed isn't one of them.
Cheers,
- Ted
