Hi Scott, On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:03:32AM +0000, Scott Ashcroft wrote: > If you could that would be best as I don't have a github account.
Alright. > > That all looks good. However. I've now had a closer look at the git > > repo > > and I find you didn't do the upstream import quite right. > > d/README.Source > > documents the correct incantation: > > > > $ gbp import-orig --component=abc --uscan > > That's exactly what I ran to start everything off. > I forked the project on salsa. > git cloned my fork. > Ran the gbp command as given above. > > I suspect that what's gone wrong is that the merge requests only cover > the master branch so you don't see the upstream (and pristine-tar) > branch commits from my fork. Huh. That's possible, but doesn't explain why abc was missing then? Looking at 581750b0 it seems to be there after all. Where did I pull the 48kLoC number from then? Weird. One theory: did you use `gbp clone`? If not some of the relevant branches might have been missing locally. Maybe gbp fails hillariously when you don't do that? Unsure. > I really expected my MR not to be merged and that only the useful > changes in debian/ would be picked up. > > I really do appreciate the work are you doing and I'm sorry if my ham- > fisted attempts to help have made it more difficult. Don't worry about it! I don't say these things to berate you for doing anything wrong, but merely to explain what's going on and motivate you to help ;-P I've been doing this Debian thing for a little while now and I still don't have a clue, but learning means being comfortable not knowing things (yet). --Daniel
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- debian-science-maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
