Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also suggest using -wn --include-dirty
Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also
suggest using -wn --include-dirty"):
> This is surely fine (people know to git add before commit and I don't
> think commit is going to make them think of dpkg-source's option):
>
> dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them.
> dgit: To include them in the build, it is usually best to just commit
> them.
LGTM, thanks.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also suggest using -wn --include-dirty
Hello, On Sun 21 Jul 2019 at 04:18PM +01, Ian Jackson wrote: > I don't mind making it friendlier but I do mind making it longer. > Excess verbiage in error messages makes it much harder to see the > point. Can you come up with a formulation that fits on one line ? On the other hand, if dgit's user-facing error message it longer it's a bit easier to pick out visually from all the other output. But fair enough. > As for the adjective, I think "best" is right. It's not only simpler > and easier; it's also less risky and better supports short-timescale > archaeology. I agree. This is surely fine (people know to git add before commit and I don't think commit is going to make them think of dpkg-source's option): dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them. dgit: To include them in the build, it is usually best to just commit them. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also suggest using -wn --include-dirty
Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could
also suggest using -wn --include-dirty"):
> On Mon 01 Jul 2019 at 01:28pm +01, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Is the idea of committing them not obvious enough ?
>
> I'd like to add the suggestion -- it might not be obvious to someone
> with a whole load of packaging stuff on the brain and not much
> experience with dgit.
>
> > If not, maybe
> > dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them.
> > dgit: To include them, you should probably git add and commit them.
> > ?
>
> A bit friendlier and less opinionated:
>
>dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them.
>dgit: To include them in the build, it is usually simplest to just
>dgit: git add and commit them.
>
> Possibly s/simplest/easiest/.
I don't mind making it friendlier but I do mind making it longer.
Excess verbiage in error messages makes it much harder to see the
point. Can you come up with a formulation that fits on one line ?
As for the adjective, I think "best" is right. It's not only simpler
and easier; it's also less risky and better supports short-timescale
archaeology.
Does that make sense ?
thanks,
Ian.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also suggest using -wn --include-dirty
Hello,
On Mon 01 Jul 2019 at 01:28pm +01, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could
> also suggest using -wn --include-dirty"):
>> A third possibility is recommending that the user stage the files and
>> then just --include-dirty should be sufficient.
>
> --include-dirty has lots of problems (not compatible with many quilt
> modes, awkwardnesses with clean handling, etc.) and I don't think we
> should be suggesting it if they user doesn't think of it. Certainly
> we shouldn't recommend using it without reading the docs.
Agreed.
> Is the idea of committing them not obvious enough ?
I'd like to add the suggestion -- it might not be obvious to someone
with a whole load of packaging stuff on the brain and not much
experience with dgit.
> If not, maybe
> dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them.
> dgit: To include them, you should probably git add and commit them.
> ?
A bit friendlier and less opinionated:
dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them.
dgit: To include them in the build, it is usually simplest to just
dgit: git add and commit them.
Possibly s/simplest/easiest/.
--
Sean Whitton
Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also suggest using -wn --include-dirty
Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also
suggest using -wn --include-dirty"):
> A third possibility is recommending that the user stage the files and
> then just --include-dirty should be sufficient.
--include-dirty has lots of problems (not compatible with many quilt
modes, awkwardnesses with clean handling, etc.) and I don't think we
should be suggesting it if they user doesn't think of it. Certainly
we shouldn't recommend using it without reading the docs.
Is the idea of committing them not obvious enough ?
If not, maybe
dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them.
dgit: To include them, you should probably git add and commit them.
?
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Bug#930930: dgit: suggestion to use -wga/-wgfa could also suggest using -wn --include-dirty
Package: dgit Version: 8.3 Severity: minor Hello, Since 8.3 dgit will error out if there are untracked files, and make the following suggestion: dgit: error: tree contains uncommited, untracked, unignored files dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them. ... to which a user might reasonably respond "but I want to keep them!" dgit could say instead: dgit: error: tree contains uncommited, untracked, unignored files dgit: You can use --clean=git[-ff],always (-wga/-wgfa) to delete them, dgit: or --clean=none --include-dirty to include them in the build. This might cause the user to run into the error message reported in #914317, so I wonder whether dgit should only do this in the case that there are no untracked files under d/patches or the source format isn't 3.0 (quilt)? Or maybe it should just refer to the docs for --include-dirty, assuming you like my patch in #930922? A third possibility is recommending that the user stage the files and then just --include-dirty should be sufficient. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
