On Fri, 2017-06-02 at 11:35 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > Hi Diane, > > On Jun 02, 2017, at 05:48 AM, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > > > partd (0.3.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium > > . > > * Switch from git-dpm to gbp > > I may be misremembering our previous discussions on the topic, but we all know > that in the long term we want to convert off of git-dpm.
Indeed. > My recollection was that in the short term, "officially" we want to > opportunistically convert packages as an experiment, and to work out the steps > needed, so that at some time in the future, we'd mass migrate the bulk of our > packages. Correct. However, I have collaborated with Diane on some of her packages (dask) and the git-dpm setup was broken. So, I took this opportunity to get rid of git-dpm and switch to gbp with her approval. > I'm curious, did you follow the steps outlined in > https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackagingPQ to do the conversion? (Search > for "Converting git-dpm to gbp pq") or did you follow some other process? Are > you adopting gbp-pq for your own workflow? Do you have any insights that will > help others convert, or that can guide our future mass migration? Is there > anything you can add to the wiki page to help others when they > opportunistically convert? I can't speak for herself for partd. For dask, the patch queue was not recognized by git-dpm, so the source tree was essentially in patch non-applied mode. The conversion was then straightforward: delete .git-dpm, add gbp.conf and do a round trip of gbp pq import / export. > For the team: should we just allow opportunistic conversions and live with a > mixed git-dpm/gbp state in our packages for a while? IMO, I believe it is not the end of the world, but I am obviously biased. Ghis
