-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Charles Fry wrote: >> For what it's worth, here are my two cents on svn-bp layouts: >> - it's easier to only manage the debian/ dir in SVN (mergeWithUpstream) >> mode, and is really a clean way of working on Debian packages (except >> it forces you to have patches below debian/ instead of directly in >> the .diff.gz) > > Agreed. But I would argue that it is better to have patches below > debian, as it makes them easier to manage, and easier to spearate by > type. There are plenty of handy tools that make this easier.
We recommend to put patches in debian/patches so it's ok for us, like Charles said ;-) >> - in general, you don't grab old packages out of the SVN, so tagging >> each package upload or upstream release doesn't add a lot; instead, I >> found the "per-dist" layout quite useful (pkg-gnome uses a bit of >> that), top-level dirs are simply: >> experimental/ >> unstable/ >> stable/ > > While the tags may not always be required, they are very cheap, and > require no explicit management when svn-upgrade is used. That said, if > we were to go with your proposal, I would prefer to see it implemented > as tags. The downside in any case is added manual intervention, or the > creation of scripts to do this for us, which is why my personal > preference would be to stick with svn-upgrade. If we do tags, I prefer we use it like we did in CVS: RELEASE_<VERSION_NUMBER>. I also heard that some pkg-groups put the original tarball in a directory of svn. - -- .''`. : :' :rnaud `. `' `- Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDwRjT4vzFZu62tMIRAuqxAJ9a31rgJj5Q9VBQ1EDqR7VlsOLzOwCfTIBd lL5sY/gRb9yF//etu7UMyvk= =aFFu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
