On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 03:08:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net writes:
Essentially, *everything* stays in git from upstream to distributed
releases to debian work and releases and also to downstreams. There's
no import of release tarballs because they are in
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 at 22:28:52 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
Best practices for Git repository layout?
- git-buildpackage documentation is closest to that
I would have to disagree here, the git-buildpackage default layout is
far too Debian-centric. By naming the Debian and Upstream branches
Adam Borowski writes (Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF):
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
git://foo.bar.org/meow#debian
At least, neither git clone, merge nor fetch understand that syntax.
They could and should, however, be updated to do so
Russ Allbery writes (Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF):
That's not the problem being discussed here. The signature is fine. The
problem is that while Joey may think that his repository is completely
DFSG-free, it's the current job of ftp-master to actually check
In data lunedì, 16. di agosto 2010 12:35:29, Ian Jackson ha scritto:
: Adam Borowski writes (Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF):
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
git://foo.bar.org/meow#debian
At least, neither git clone, merge nor fetch
Hi Roger,
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 10:28:52PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
[..snip..]
Best practices for Git repository layout?
- git-buildpackage documentation is closest to that
I would have to disagree here, the git-buildpackage
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Since this is open for discussion, some comments about my take
on some of the discussed points:
ftp-team is concerned about doing license checks across the entire git
archive Colin points out that we're in the same situation with
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net writes:
I can see that this could be a legitmate cause for concern, especially
since the history is essentially immutable and if tainted will remain
so unless it's deliberately excised and the history is altered.
However, is this a problem in reality, or just
Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
This is easy: you just publish two trees, rather than two branches in
the same tree. (It's a shame that there isn't a syntax for git
clone which checks out a particular branch.)
The --branch option to git-clone is going to
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:39:35AM +0200, Josef Spillner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
This is easy: you just publish two trees, rather than two branches in
the same tree. (It's a shame that there isn't a syntax for git
clone which checks out a
On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 00:10 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:39:35AM +0200, Josef Spillner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
This is easy: you just publish two trees, rather than two branches in
the same tree. (It's a shame that
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 00:10 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:39:35AM +0200, Josef Spillner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 12. August 2010, 16:36:56 schrieb Ian Jackson:
This is easy: you just publish two trees,
Giacomo A. Catenazzi writes (Re: Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF):
I think there are three usual use of the sources:
- developers/bug trackers/...
- users: to check and to learn the sources
- admins: who need to recompile/backport/.. sources
Using git for the last two groups seems
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 at 20:27:24 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
One issue with 3.0 (quilt) is that when you check it out when it's
maintained in a VCS, you have two choices: commit the .pc directory and
files, or leave it out and then have to run some magic
[...]
- Why don't you just check in with
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes:
Thanks for this very detailed notes! Can you please also upload them as
attachment to the Penta event at
http://penta.debconf.org/dc10_schedule/events/691.en.html ?
I've uploaded the notes as an attachment to the scheduled event inside
Penta. They
* Russ Allbery r...@debian.org [100811 05:27]:
If you're implementing 3.0 format, please don't hard-code the extensions that
you know will be found in source packages, because as we add additional
files listed in *.dsc, we may add other types of files.
Please be carefull with adding new
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
source.debian.org is working on importing source packages into a Git
repository and storing the history as one revision per new source package
upload.
That gives a 404. source.debian.net doesn't, but gives you a page with
as full
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
source.debian.org is working on importing source packages into a Git
repository and storing the history as one revision per new source package
upload.
That
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:27:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
that I missed
]] Russ Allbery
| After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
| source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
| discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
| that I missed things. Other participants, please add
Russ Allbery writes (Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF):
* Part of Joey's motivation is that if you look at GitHub, the
people using it a lot consider Git to be a source package format,
I've been doing that for some non-Debian work. It turns out to be
incredibly convenient, if you're
Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no writes:
]] Russ Allbery
| After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
| source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
| discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
| that I
On 08/11/2010 06:47 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
Russ Allbery writes (Notes from the DebConf Source Format BoF):
* Part of Joey's motivation is that if you look at GitHub, the
people using it a lot consider Git to be a source package format,
I've been doing that for some non-Debian work
After a discussion on IRC, I organized a BoF at DebConf10 to discuss new
source formats, specifically 3.0 (git). Below are the notes from that
discussion. I tried to take reasonably comprehensive notes, but I'm sure
that I missed things. Other participants, please add any additional bits
that I
24 matches
Mail list logo
