On Thursday, 14 July 2016 8:51:10 AM AEST Vincent Bernat wrote:
> I am using "gbp import-orig" (with --uscan if possible),

Me too. :)

> so I don't see
> this branch as particularly difficult to maintain.

Not too difficult. But quite often it fails on merge to "master"... Also 
repacking orig tarball and re-importing it with "gbp import-orig" have little 
value, given the effort. Imported tarballs quickly depreciate and maintenance 
cost is not negligible. KDE team maintains all their packages without 
overhead of "upstream" branches. IMHO abandoning "upstream" branches 
(especially if they are used merely to accommodate imported tarballs) would 
be particularly beneficial to our team where so many packages need DFSG-
cleanup and repackaging.

> I would only create it from this point of time. I don't think anybody is
> likely to be interested by the complete history.

Good idea.

> So, I'll wait for Jelmer's opinion before switching to the classic gbp
> layout.

Thanks. I think he might appreciate that. But if he do not respond for some 
time please do not hesitate to do the right thing. :)

 Dmitry Smirnov.


Good luck happens when preparedness meets opportunity.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to