Le 20/11/2010 12:05, Ralf Treinen a écrit : > I suggest that we add to the dom packaging reference that branches intended > for primary release into a distribution should be named like that > distribution, that is experimental, squeeze, whatever-backport, etc, with > the exception that the branch for sid is called master. Does that sound > reasonable?
My own practice is to use git-buildpackage's defaults (master, upstream) for unstable, and prefix them by "experimental/" (e.g. experimental/master and experimental/upstream) for experimental. For $codename, I would similarly create $codename/master and $codename/upstream. I'd like to see this adopted by the team. Having two git branches (master/upstream) per Debian branch is IMHO cleaner, and also fits better with git-buildpackage. I got used to it and saw nothing better so far. I find the name "experimental" ambiguous, and the words look in the wrong order in master-experimental. And upstream/$whatever conclicts with git-buildpackage's default name for the upstream branch. Starting names with $branch/ doesn't conflict with gbp's defaults, and forces to use an additionnal component name that makes the name meaningful gbp-wise. I don't branch pristine-tar (and BTW I don't even always commit there tarballs I don't upload to the official archive, especially snapshots), given the fact that files once there are there forever, and new files don't disturb tools (gbp, pristine-tar itself). Cheers, -- Stéphane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
