Status update: I discovered (and documented) gbp’s postclone=origtargz option. Also, I prepared (and documented/referenced) two git hooks.
I’m still not entirely certain about how to approach the “upstream branch contains upstream git history” change in the best way. Suggestions/tips welcome. On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Michael Stapelberg <stapelb...@debian.org> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Martín Ferrari <tin...@tincho.org> wrote: >> On 09/11/17 04:24, Michael Stapelberg wrote: >> >>> At least for our transition period, we’ll have to use origtargz. >> >> Yes, but only for -2 and up releases. For -1, origtargz would do the >> same as gbp (AFAIK). > > Yes, for -1 releases, users supply the orig tarball :) > >> >>> I’m happy to pro-actively add compression algorithm/level options and >>> evaluate at a later time whether that worked. I think just testing >>> across different machines is a good start, but we should also pass the >>> test of time — perhaps we can easily simulate that by testing on >>> stable/oldstable. >> Not sure if we need to devote a lot of time to this, after all, the >> worst that can happen is a rejected upload because of checksum mismatches. > > Personally, I find rejected uploads super frustrating, especially > because of the large delay in between the action and the result (up to > half an hour). > > I’d really like to define a workflow which makes them a thing of the > past. For the time being, this is using origtargz. > > -- > Best regards, > Michael -- Best regards, Michael _______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkgfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers