Please remove the following email address: e.little...@gmail.com On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 10:39 PM Debian Bug Tracking System < ow...@bugs.debian.org> wrote:
> Your message dated Sat, 09 Sep 2023 19:35:06 -0700 > with message-id <87a5tu21t1....@hope.eyrie.org> > and subject line Re: Bug#1030382: encourage Vcs-Git over other Vcs-* > headers > has caused the Debian Bug report #1030382, > regarding encourage Vcs-Git over other Vcs-* headers > to be marked as done. > > This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. > If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the > Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. > > (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this > message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system > misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org > immediately.) > > > -- > 1030382: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1030382 > Debian Bug Tracking System > Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Jelmer Vernooij <jel...@debian.org> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <sub...@bugs.debian.org> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 17:24:36 +0000 > Subject: encourage Vcs-Git over other Vcs-* headers > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > > Policy currently describes Vcs-* headers as something optional, but stops > to > endorse a particular Vcs. > > At this point, it seems uncontroversial to encourage use of Vcs-Git > specifically here. Apart from technical arguments, it's the vcs that the > majority of packages in the archive uses - and thus will have the better > tooling, less of a learning curve for other contributors, etc. > > There are very few holdouts of other vcses in the archive. I count 62 > (ignoring those with an alioth URL): > > * 26 on Svn > * 3 on Cvs > * 4 on Hg (2 are hg/hg-buildpackage) > * 39 on bzr (half of these are actually bzr and related packages, which I > maintain) > > Cheers, > > Jelmer > > -- System Information: > Debian Release: bookworm/sid > APT prefers unstable > APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing') > Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) > > Kernel: Linux 6.0.0-5-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU threads; PREEMPT) > Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE > not set > Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash > Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) > LSM: AppArmor: enabled > > debian-policy depends on no packages. > > Versions of packages debian-policy recommends: > ii libjs-sphinxdoc 5.3.0-3 > > Versions of packages debian-policy suggests: > pn doc-base <none> > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> > To: Jelmer Vernooij <jel...@debian.org> > Cc: 1030382-d...@bugs.debian.org > Bcc: > Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2023 19:35:06 -0700 > Subject: Re: Bug#1030382: encourage Vcs-Git over other Vcs-* headers > Jelmer Vernooij <jel...@debian.org> writes: > > > I've created a PR for devref - > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/developers-reference/-/merge_requests/41 > > > Are you saying that it doesn't belong in policy because it'd be a > > recommendation rather than a must/should (at this point?), or because > > it's more about the workflow inside of Debian than package contents? > > Policy only documents the contents of source and binary packages and a few > related topics like the archive structure and the various control files > that come along with packages. How packages are maintained is, so far at > least, mostly outside the scope of Policy, which includes making concrete > recommendations about version control systems, forges, workflows, etc. > > Therefore, the Developers Reference is the right spot for this. Since > that has been merged, I'm going to close out this Policy bug. > > -- > Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
