]] Goswin von Brederlow | Tollef Fog Heen <[email protected]> writes: | | > ]] Goswin von Brederlow | > | My feeling is that 3.0 (git) format adds bloat to the source packages | > | that hardly anyone ever uses, makes it that much harder for any | > | non-git user to edit the source and is of little extra value when the | > | maintainers git is month or years further along. | > | > Even if the upstream VCS has moved on, you save a bit of bandwidth by | > having something that comes with half the history, even if you don't | > have all of it. | | Weigh that against the bandwidth spend for mirrors and for people that | do not need or want the history and the extra cost in terms of needing | more CD/DVD images to contain a source snapshot. Also the cost for | snapshot.debian.org having to have the extra bloat for every single | version uploaded. For a worst case take linux-2.6 as example.
If we (as I do) consider history part of the source, that size increase is irrelevant. | Also why would you download the source package in the first place if | what you really want is a git checkout. The extra bandwidth for a git | checkout would only be as much as the 3.0 (git) format would lack in | history. Because I want to add a patch that changes a behaviour in a stable package, and I want to add that patch in a way that gives me the least work, both when writing it, but also when bringing it forward. Also, my mirror might be local; git.d.o and random upstream repositories certainly are not. | My expectation is also that I can "apt-get source foo", edit some | files and debuild without having to learn a new tool and completly | foreign workflow. The various patch systems used with 1.0 packages | destroy that somewhat but 3.0 (quilt) restores that feature again. 3.0 | (git) on the other hand goes in the wrong direction as it makes the | package even more special. I'm trying to come up with a reasonable workflow rather than getting entangled in what intricasies of the different source package formats. At the moment, what I want is best done with a bundle in debian/ and a 3.0 (native) package and a README.source. | But in the end it comes down to taste I guess. Do you want to force | people to use git or are you friendly to those that don't use it? | So I will shut up now before we go around the circle again. I don't see why you think «ship the history with the package» (which is what I want to do) implies that you can't do apt-get source foo ; cd foo-* ; hack. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
