Let's discuss this here. At least mitya57 has wished for Ubuntu's Qt
packaging to from Launchpad to Debian git, similar to how Kubuntu
(Ubuntu's KDE flavor) has moved KDE packaging to Debian git branches.
Lisandro however wanted to discuss this more formally and I agree.
I did a couple of cleanup uploads this week and now put up the ubuntu
branch of qtbase to git:
This can still be easily removed of course and I can go back to
I was planning to follow mesa
(http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-xorg/lib/mesa.git) way of using eg
ubuntu and ubuntu+1 branches.
I don't mind doing it either way, both have pros and cons. Like:
Pros Debian git
- Closer to Debian where a lot is directly synced from anyway
- Easier for Debian people to see what Ubuntu is doing differently if
Cons Debian git
- Limits access to pkg-kde people
- Brings all Ubuntu commits to Debian git
Related to the first con, practically all commits in the Ubuntu
Launchpad branch have been done by people who are both Ubuntu
developers and Debian pkg-kde members. I also prefer that all changes
go through those people. Other people in Ubuntu (on the Unity 8 side)
are used to going through me for Qt patches/changes. And Kubuntu
people are familiar with going through Debian.
Now all Ubuntu core developers are technically allowed to upload Qt
packages, so that's different from Debian. If that happens past me,
that'd mean I'd need to sync up those changes to Debian git. So this
process difference is there, even though it's the same as for KDE
packages' kubuntu branches.
I was currently planning to do this only for qtbase, as that's where
most of the action happens. 14 Qt packages are directly synced from
Debian as is, and the rest with modifications (qtdeclarative,
qtwebkit, qtgraphicaleffects, qtmultimedia, qtsensors, ...) have more
minor changes than qtbase. Many have just transitional packages until
the next LTS release.
As said, I can handle it either way and I'm already used to the manual
syncing process with Debian also for qtbase.