2015-05-22 18:19 GMT+03:00 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez <perezme...@gmail.com>:
>> 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.
> With my "I really don't understand much of how ubuntu works" hat on I like the
> idea with minor exception: I would keep debian branches as they currently are:
> master for whatever has to go to unstable, experimental, <release>, etc. And
> this just to keep the current workflow, nothing more, nothing else.
Sure, I only meant the naming of the Ubuntu branches.
> If we keep this as a hard rule to follow, I'm all for it. If someone from
> Ubuntu wants to be able to commit [s]he has to follow the same principles for
> every new contributor
Absolutely. At this point I don't see others joining Qt packaging from
Canonical side of Ubuntu people, but that can always change. I'm
sometimes away but that doesn't necessarily require new pkg-kde
members. Let's see if a need arises.
> And that also means that if someone uploaded something which should have not
> been uploaded you will not cherry pick that change into our branches, so
> that's totally fine.
Yes. There will be some ugly patches in Ubuntu not suitable for
Debian. A good example is this one "on a certain phone, a driver
reports a wrong feature to Qt and we can't fix the driver at the
moment". Some may be more middle ground or inspiring, like the
alternative qmake build for armhf cross-building. Ubuntu devs also
upstream + cherry-pick many bug fixes, and those can be cherry-picked
to Debian easily if they seem serious enough.
2015-05-22 18:53 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Shachnev <mity...@debian.org>:
> - We already have kubuntu_unstable branches (created by Rohan) for all
> Qt modules, which currently do not have Ubuntu delta actually applied
> there. I think it's quite confusing.
I was also wondering about those, but as discussed on IRC, they're
related to Kubuntu's CI efforts. Maybe they'll move, or maybe they'll
rebase on the Ubuntu branches (once available).
> Timo said that the packaging is for whole Ubuntu, not just Kubuntu.
> However the previous Bzr repositories also had kubuntu in their name,
> so I don't think anything changes here.
The kubuntu-packagers team in Ubuntu was selected for continuation in
2012, as Qt 4 was there too. But it has been confusing for many, and
"Ubuntu" is the umbrella term for the Qt using Ubuntu flavors which
already include Ubuntu, Kubuntu and now Lubuntu in this cycle.
> - It's git, not bzr :)
That's starting to be an obsolete point, as Launchpad has just started
to support git :) https://help.launchpad.net/Code/Git Anyhow, that'll
probably help in setting up true mirrors instead of gateway'd ones.
> Yes, I think that if we have qtbase in Git, then we should have
> anything else in Git as well.
That's true, maybe not immediately but with moving to Qt 5.5 it'd be natural.