Re: git-dpm required?
Hello, On Tue 31 Jul 2018 at 12:00AM -0400, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > On Monday, July 30 2018, Sean Whitton wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> On Mon 30 Jul 2018 at 09:54PM -0400, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: >> >>> This is my understanding as well: git-dpm is not mandatory anymore, and >>> gbp is the preferred tool. I've been packaging all of my Python modules >>> using gbp for a while. >> >> Do I have to use the full suite of gbp tools (e.g. gbp-pq) or is it >> enough that `gbp buildpackage` will work? > > You don't have to use the full suite if you don't like. The important > thing is to have the repository in the correct format > (debian/upstream/pristine-tar branches [or something else, as long as > properly documented in d/gbp.conf], tags, etc.), so that other people > can use gbp without problems. Thank you. Just to note that gbp will work with patches-applied too, but I won't do that. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: git-dpm required?
On Monday, July 30 2018, Sean Whitton wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon 30 Jul 2018 at 09:54PM -0400, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > >> This is my understanding as well: git-dpm is not mandatory anymore, and >> gbp is the preferred tool. I've been packaging all of my Python modules >> using gbp for a while. > > Do I have to use the full suite of gbp tools (e.g. gbp-pq) or is it > enough that `gbp buildpackage` will work? You don't have to use the full suite if you don't like. The important thing is to have the repository in the correct format (debian/upstream/pristine-tar branches [or something else, as long as properly documented in d/gbp.conf], tags, etc.), so that other people can use gbp without problems. Not even gbp buildpackage is mandatory; you can use your own build workflow if you want. -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: git-dpm required?
Hi, út 31. 7. 2018 v 11:00 odesílatel Sean Whitton napsal: > Do I have to use the full suite of gbp tools (e.g. gbp-pq) or is it > enough that `gbp buildpackage` will work? > only important thing is: it's patches unapplied git. If you want to use quilt or qbp pq is up to you, because result is same (imho) -- Best regards Ondřej Nový Email: n...@ondrej.org PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5 6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B
Re: git-dpm required?
Hello, On Mon 30 Jul 2018 at 09:54PM -0400, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > This is my understanding as well: git-dpm is not mandatory anymore, and > gbp is the preferred tool. I've been packaging all of my Python modules > using gbp for a while. Do I have to use the full suite of gbp tools (e.g. gbp-pq) or is it enough that `gbp buildpackage` will work? -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: git-dpm required?
On Monday, July 30 2018, Sean Whitton wrote: > [please CC me] > > Hello, > > The team policy says that git-dpm is mandatory but someone here at > DebConf (sorry, can't remember who) told me that since the move to > salsa, this has been relaxed to the simple requirement that the tree be > buildable with `gbp buildpackage`. > > Before I add a new python library to Debian, pleast let me know whether > I have to use git-dpm. Hi Sean, This is my understanding as well: git-dpm is not mandatory anymore, and gbp is the preferred tool. I've been packaging all of my Python modules using gbp for a while. Thanks, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
git-dpm required?
[please CC me] Hello, The team policy says that git-dpm is mandatory but someone here at DebConf (sorry, can't remember who) told me that since the move to salsa, this has been relaxed to the simple requirement that the tree be buildable with `gbp buildpackage`. Before I add a new python library to Debian, pleast let me know whether I have to use git-dpm. Thanks. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
