Otto Kekäläinen [02/Mar 12:20pm +08] wrote: > Your own packages would be a great reference *if* they would be > maintained more like the majority does, but it does not seem like > that. > > Looking at the 11 packages you personally maintain listed at > https://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=spwhitton%40spwhitton.name&nouploader1=on&nosponsor1=on&email2=&email3=&packages=&ignpackages=&format=html#todo > I see that: > > - None of them are hosted on salsa.debian.org, unlike most Debian > packages are nowadays (which brings along it several workflow aspects) > - 10 out of 11 have a broken uscan result as reported by Debaudit, > indicating that you maybe don't care to maintain watch files (while > most other DDs do maintain them)
This is unfair cherry-picking. The other 51 packages on my DDPO are maintained on salsa in more ordinary ways. I just do things differently when I'm also the upstream for a package. But they are the minority. > Respectfully, since you are not using the workflows most other people > do, you are probably blind to the shortcomings in end-to-end workflows > of the systems you develop. I wish you were more open to feedback to > learn about the shortcomings and willing to address them. I have used those workflows extensively in team maintenance situations. I have experience maintaining packages with: gbp; git-dpm; git-debrebase; plain git-merge; the DHG monorepo; debian/-only; I've used pristine-tar many times too. The only thing I think I haven't tried is the way the Rust team do it. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
